Continuous improvement essential criteria

International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management
Continuous improvement: the ten essential criteria

Mike Kaye, Rosalyn Anderson,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Mike Kaye, Rosalyn Anderson, (1999) "Continuous improvement: the ten essential criteria",
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 16 Issue: 5, pp.485-509, doi:
10.1108/02656719910249801
Permanent link to this document:
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF PORTSMOUTH At 04:38 30 April 2017 (PT)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656719910249801
Downloaded on: 30 April 2017, At: 04:38 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 13 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 5325 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(1999),"Developing strategic continuous improvement capability", International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, Vol. 19 Iss 11 pp. 1106-1119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443579910291032
(1997),"Continuous improvement and kaizen: standardization and organizational designs", Integrated
Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 8 Iss 2 pp. 110-117 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09576069710165792
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:205243 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Continuous improvement: the Continuous
improvement
ten essential criteria
Mike Kaye
University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK, and 485
Rosalyn Anderson
Hampshire County Council, Winchester, UK Received March 1998
Revised November 1998
Keywords Improvement, Kaizen, Leadership, Management, Quality, Self-assessment
Abstract This study advocates a planned and integrated approach for achieving continuous
improvement in an organisation. A model based on ten essential criteria and supporting elements
of ``best practice'' is provided. The role of senior management in ceaselessly driving the
improvement cause is emphasized together with the need to focus on stakeholder requirements,
measure performance and learn from results. The underpinning foundations are seen to be a
culture for innovation, focusing on critical processes and the involvement of employees, together
with the integration of improvement activities throughout the organisation. Use of the proposed
model is seen as preparatory for, and complementary to, the more complex models (such as the
business excellence model or Baldrige criteria) which are useful where an organisation already has
the foundations and culture for improvement and wishes to stretch itself further.
Introduction
This study has found that, even where organisations are using self-assessment
techniques and employing other positive approaches to quality management, they
are failing to sustain continuous improvement in the longer term. In today's complex
and rapidly changing business environment there is a bewildering number of
models and approaches advocated for achieving business excellence and continuous
improvement. For example: the business excellence model, the Malcolm Baldrige
National Quality Award, the Deming model, total quality management (TQM),
business process re-engineering (BPR), Investors in People (IIP), and ISO 9000.
There still appears to be no one panacea which will guarantee immediate and
long-lasting success in improving quality and it is no wonder that many busy
managers just do not have the time nor patience to try to grapple with the array
of initiatives which have been actively promoted over the past decade. Outlines a
new, and easily applied, model which will enable an organisation to establish the
foundations for achieving and sustaining continuous improvement.
So why is continuous improvement important?

Approaches to quality have evolved significantly since the beginning of this
century. Four major quality eras have been identified (Bounds et al., 1994):
(1) inspection;
(2) statistical quality control;
International Journal of Quality &
(3) quality assurance; Reliability Management,
Vol. 16 No. 5, 1999, pp. 485-506.
(4) strategic quality management. # MCB University Press, 0256-671X
IJQRM Each quality era built on the previous era. During the first three eras quality was
16,5 viewed as a problem to be solved and the focus was on the internal operations of
the organisation. In the 1980s, quality was seen for the first time as a competitive
opportunity, a strategic weapon that could be used against competitors. Thus, in
the fourth quality era the focus was on the customer and the organisation was
more proactive in anticipating and responding to both customer and market needs.
486 Continued top management commitment and involvement in quality was seen as
paramount to ensure that quality was fully integrated into business strategy and
plans and that it was adequately deployed throughout the organisation.
The strategic quality management approach, however, is still inadequate to
meet today's rapidly changing business environment, characterised by
uncertainty and unpredictability. To meet these challenges, a fifth quality era

competitive continuous improvement has been identified (Kaye and Dyason,
1995). Here, the primary concern is with the organisation being flexible,
responsive and able to adapt quickly to changes needed in strategy in the light
of feedback from customers and from benchmarking against competitors.
For an organisation to achieve flexibility, responsiveness and the ability to
adapt quickly to changes within its environment, the implementation of a
sound strategy for continuous improvement is essential.
The use of self-assessment to achieve continuous improvement

Self-assessment is an approach which is used to underpin continuous
improvement by measuring an organisation's current performance against a
model which represents a position of `èxcellence''. The most frequently used
self-assessment models are the business excellence model and the Malcolm
Baldrige National Quality Award (Davies et al., 1996).
But do these models achieve their aim, or do they just add to the complexity
and confusion faced by busy managers?
The business excellence model, illustrated in Figure 1, has been described as
an inclusive framework for managing change which displays links between
cause and effect (Lascelles and Peacock, 1996). By improving the ``how'' of a
company's operations (i.e. the enablers), improved results are said to follow for
People People
Management Satisfaction
9% 9%
Customer Business
Leadership Policy and Processes
Satisfaction Results
10% Strategy 8% 14%
20% 15%
Figure 1. Resources Impact on Society

The European business 9% 6%
excellence model
Source: Lascelles and Peacock, (1996)
each of its key stakeholders (financial, customers, employees and society). Continuous
There is a weighted, complex scoring mechanism which is used to determine improvement
the organisation's performance within each of the model elements and identify
an overall assessment.
The Baldrige model, illustrated in Figure 2, has three basic elements:
(1) Strategy and action plans these guide overall resource decisions and 487
drive the alignment of measures for all work units to ensure customer
satisfaction and market success.
(2) System this comprises the six Baldrige categories that define the
organisation, its operations, and its results.
(3) Information and analysis seen as critical to the effective management

of the company and to a fact-based system for improving performance
and competitiveness. This serves as a foundation for the performance
management system.
The 1998 revised criteria for the Baldrige model aim to achieve a comprehensive
coverage of strategy-driven performance, addressing the needs of all stakeholders.
There is a stronger systems view of performance management and greater
emphasis is placed on the alignment of company strategy, customer and market
knowledge, a high performance workforce, key company processes, and business
results. In addition, there is increased focus on all aspects of organisational and
employee learning (National Institute for Standards and Technology, 1998).
A systems perspective
Customer and Market Focused

Strategy and Action Plans
2 5
Strategic Human
Planning Resource
Focus
1 7
Leadership Business
Results
3
Customer 6
and Market Process
Focus Management
Figure 2.
4 The Baldrige criteria for
Information and Analysis
performance excellence
framework
Source: National Institute for Standards and Technology (1998)
IJQRM The Baldrige model also has a weighted scoring mechanism and there is much
16,5 commonality between this model and the business excellence model.
While each of these models provides a holistic approach to an organisation,
they do not sufficiently emphasize the factors which will generate and keep the
improvement momentum going in between self-assessment checks.
The scoring mechanisms, if managers have the time to understand and
488 implement them, can encourage number chasing rather than business
improvement.
The business excellence model has been found to be lacking in respect of
``drivers'' and it is suggested that these are the organisation's mission, critical
success factors (key areas) and aims (Dyason and Kaye, 1995). These are seen to:
. focus management attention;

. give vision and direction;
. provide a statement of management commitment;
. put the needs of the customer at the front and foremost of the
organisation's direction.
An alternative model, which includes a continuous improvement loop, has been
developed to overcome this weakness and is illustrated in Figure 3.
Our study has found, however, that even where an organisation has
identified a mission and critical success factors, these are still not sufficient to
drive and sustain continuous improvement.
So what are the key criteria for achieving and sustaining continuous
improvement?
We carried out a literature review to ascertain the key criteria that need to be in
place for an organisation to achieve and, more importantly, sustain continuous
improvement. The review considered in particular the views of Berk (1993),
Bessant and Caffyn (1997), Bounds et al. (1994), Dale and Boaden (1994),
Continuous Improvement Loop (Internal)
Critical Success Factors Aims People People

Policy and Strategy
Management satisfaction
Critical Success Factors Aims
Leadership
Processes
Results
Customer
Mission satisfaction
Impact on
Resources Community
DRIVERS ENABLERS RESULTS

Figure 3.
Competitive continuous
improvement model Competitive Continuous Improvement Loop
Source: Dyason and Kaye (1995)
Dyason and Kaye (1995), Huda (1992), Imai (1986), Oakland (1993), and the Continuous
elements of the self-assessment models outlined above. improvement
Based on a synthesis and interpretation of these views, five important and
common themes were identified:
(1) leadership;
(2) strategic focus; 489
(3) organisational culture and focusing on employees;
(4) processes, standardisation and measurement;
(5) learning from results.
Following further analysis, ten key criteria were derived from the review and
these are given below.
(1) Senior management commitment and involvement.
(2) Leadership and active commitment to continuous improvement
demonstrated by managers at all levels.
(3) Focusing on the needs of the customer.
(4) Integrating continuous improvement activities into the strategic goals
across the whole organisation, across boundaries and at all levels.
(5) Establishing a culture for continuous improvement and encouraging
high involvement innovation.
(6) Focusing on people.
(7) Focusing on critical processes.
(8) Standardizing achievements in a documented quality management system.
(9) Establishing measurement and feedback systems.
(10) Learning from continuous improvement results, the automatic capturing
and sharing of learning.
The ten individual key criteria did not appear to highlight anything new. What
was missing were the elements that would turn this static list of criteria into a
dynamic process model. Only by doing this would it be possible to find the key
to making improvement ``continuous'' and self-generating.
An attempt was therefore made to identify the linkages and inter-
relationships between the key criteria. In particular, what were the criteria
which had to be in place before continuous improvement could begin, and what
would ensure that the momentum would be sustained over time? Figure 4
shows how it was thought the key criteria might relate to form the basis of a
model for continuous improvement. At this stage the organisational culture
and learning from continuous improvement results were thought to be the
`ènergisers'' of the model, with the other criteria forming the necessary linkages
IJQRM
16,5 CULTURE FOR CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT AND INNOVATION
490 ROLE OF SENIOR

MANAGEMENT LEADERSHIP FOCUS ON
EMPLOYEES
INTEGRATION OF
FOCUS ON THE CONTINUOUS
CUSTOMER IMPROVEMENT
ACTIVITIES
STANDARDISATION/
QUALITY FOCUS ON CRITICAL
MANAGEMENT PROCESSES
SYSTEM
MEASUREMENT AND
FEEDBACK SYSTEMS
Figure 4.
Continuous
LEARNING FROM CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT RESULTS
improvement model
and foundations which had to be present before improvement could be

achieved. However, these views were modified as a result of subsequent
research, as outlined in Figure 4.
Using this model, the next stage in the study was an attempt to validate it
against the experiences of organisations which had demonstrated a proactive
approach to quality and continuous improvement in terms of either using self-
assessment techniques or establishing other mechanisms or approaches towards
quality improvement (such as the use of ISO 9000 or Investors in People).
Survey investigation
For this purpose, we chose a survey as the method for gathering the
information because it was well suited to descriptive studies where the interest
is in exploring aspects of a situation, seeking an explanation and providing
data for testing hypotheses (Robson, 1993). We carried out the survey using Continuous
personal interviews because: improvement
. the personal interview not only obtains the required information but also
allows probing questions and supplementary information to be collected;
. the questions would be too complex for the purposes of either a postal
questionnaire or telephone survey; 491
. it was more likely to be acceptable to the respondents than either postal
or telephone survey.
A sample of 18 organisations (see Table I) was taken and a senior manager
with responsibility for quality management within each organisation was
interviewed. Using a semi-structured questionnaire, the interviews allowed an

in-depth case study of each organisation.
The findings
While the organisations interviewed cannot be taken as representative of the
universal approach to continuous improvement within the business sectors
from which they were drawn, many ``good'' practices were identified. For some
organisations in particular these included:
. evidence of senior management leadership and direction setting,
availability to staff, recognition of successes;
. customer and stakeholder focus;
. development of a culture for continuous improvement and communications;
. employee involvement;
. use of improvement teams;
. training and development and use of the Investors in People standard;
. focus on processes and the constructive use of self-assessment techniques;
. measurement and feedback.
However, some organisations displayed weaknesses which included:
. lack of identification of critical success factors;
. lack of understanding of the concepts of quality and continuous
improvement by some managers and employees;
. insufficient integration of continuous improvement activities;
Size Nature of business Business sector
Large (>1,000 employees) 10 Manufacturing 8 Private 14

Table I.
Medium (250-1,000 employees) 5 Service 10 Public 4 Composition of sample
Small (< 250 employees) 3 organisations
IJQRM . existence of a ``blame culture'' when mistakes occur which may inhibit
16,5 innovation;
. reliance on ``quick fixes'' and fire fighting;
. low level of employee empowerment;
. lack of non-financial performance measures in some organisations.
492
The findings from the survey, which are expanded below, substantiated the ten
key criteria with the exception of one modification which led to extending the
criteria for strategic focus to include all stakeholders, not just customers.
Elements of best practice

None of the organisations interviewed displayed excellent performance in all of

the key criteria. However, during the analysis of the survey investigation
results, elements of best practice were identified which were considered to help
underpin each of the key criteria (see Tables II-XI inclusive). Some of the
elements of best practice were common to more than one key criterion, which
illustrated the integrative nature of the emerging model. The linkages are
shown by cross referencing of the element numbers in the tables following.
1. Senior management commitment and involvement
1.1 Senior management should, in consultation with other managers and staff, establish a
vision and mission statements for the organisation which clearly identify the long-
term aims and purpose of the business/service
1.2 Appropriate business objectives and associated critical success factors should be
identified which link to the vision, mission and business plans
1.3 Effective communication mechanisms to inform, raise awareness and involve staff in
the aims of the organisation should be established (Links to 5.3)
1.4 Business objectives should be cascaded and linked into individual staff work
objectives (for example, using the Investors in People standard) (Links to 4.1)
1.5 Timely review points should be planned for revisiting the vision, mission statements,
business plans and objectives, individual objectives to modify or re-energise as
appropriate and demonstrate/ensure constancy of purpose (Links to 3.4)
1.6 An appropriate quality policy which includes a commitment to continuous
improvement should be implemented and publicised
1.7 Senior management should demonstrate its commitment and involvement to quality
and continuous improvement by regularly being available to speak to staff through:
operating an `òpen door'' policy, walking the floor and holding briefing and feedback
meetings.
1.8 Senior management commitment should be demonstrated through their acting on
Table II. issues raised by staff, or which they themselves identify, which lead to improvements
Elements of best in quality or the working environment
practice associated
with senior 1.9 Mechanisms should be established in order to identify ``successes'' at organisational,
management team and individual levels
commitment and 1.10 Mechanisms should be established for recognising, communicating and where
involvement appropriate rewarding, successes
2. Leadership and active commitment demonstrated by all managers Continuous
improvement
2.1 The awareness of all managers should be raised, and training provided where
appropriate, as to the relevance and importance of quality and continuous
improvement within their particular organisational context (Links to 5.1)
2.2 All managers should be fully aware of the long term strategies of the organisation
(see 1.1, 1.2 and 1.4 above) and have appropriate measurable objectives for 493
achievement for themselves and their teams
Table III.
2.3 The skills needed by managers to equip them to cope within the rapidly changing Elements of best
business environment and adopt the appropriate style of management of employees practice associated
(e.g. coaching) should be assessed. Appropriate management development programmes with leadership by all
should be considered managers
3. Stakeholder focus
3.1 The organisation's major stakeholders should be identified, e.g.

.
Customers
.
Shareholders
.
Employees
.
Suppliers, etc.
3.2 Mechanisms should be established to identify and keep up-to-date with the changing
needs and expectations of stakeholders (e.g. through regular contacts and meetings,
surveys, feedback from employees/field staff, etc.)
3.3 Mechanisms should be established to regularly review the level of stakeholders'
satisfaction (particularly customers and employees)
3.4 The organisation's long and stort term strategies (vision, mission, critical success Table IV.
factors, operational objectives, etc.) should be regularly reviewed, and modified as Elements of best
necessary, in the light of feedback from stakeholders (particularly customers) (Links practice associated
to 1.5) with stakeholder focus
4. Integration of continuous improvement
4.1 The organisation's strategic aims and objectives should be used to identify and
prioritise continuous improvement activities across the whole organisation, across Table V.
functional boundaries and at all levels (Links to 1.4) Elements of best
4.2 Self-assessment techniques using a recognised model (e.g. the European business practice associated
excellence model or Baldrige Award criteria) should be considered to help identify with integration of
improvement areas across the organisation and promote a holistic approach to continuous
continuous improvement (Links to 7.7 and 9.9) improvement activities
IJQRM 5. Culture for continuous improvement
16,5
5.1 All employees should be made aware (at induction and subsequent training as
appropriate) of the general concepts of quality as it applies to them and their
particular organisation's context (Links to 2.1)
5.2 Managers should continuously reinforce the culture for continuous improvement by
494 regularly checking and raising the awareness and understanding of employees
5.3 Effective communication systems should be established to ensure that appropriate and
timely information flows vertically (top down and bottom up) and horizontally at all
levels. Consideration should be given to:
.
Information audits
.
Employee surveys
.
Employee newsletters
Table VI.
.
Use of e-mail
Elements of best
.
Use of improvement teams
practice associated
.
Staff briefing meetings
with culture for
.
Staff review and appraisal systems (Links to 1.3)
continuous 5.4 Multi-disciplinary teams should be established as required to focus on quality
improvement improvement issues (Links to 6.1 and 6.6)
6. Focusing on employees
6.1 Management should continually encourage staff to actively participate in identifying

improvements and making changes by promoting this:
.
At staff development/appraisal meetings
.
Through the ideas system
.
Through the use of project teams and focus groups
.
Through training (Links to 5.4 and 6.6)
6.2 Employees should be actively asked for their ideas and contributions (Links to 5.2)
6.3 All employees should have the opportunity, if they wish, to participate in
improvement activities from time to time (e.g. through improvement teams, project
work and training)
6.4 An effective, two-way, staff development appraisal system should be established
6.5 Consideration should be given to job swapping, secondments, work shadowing, etc. for
employees to learn the roles of others and gain greater understanding of how their
own roles fit into the organisation
6.6 The effectiveness of all teams established (permanent and ad hoc) should be reviewed,
e.g. terms of reference, objectives, team membership and interaction, achievement of
objectives. Facilitators should be used where appropriate to give guidance and
motivation as appropriate (Links to 5.4 and 6.1)
6.7 Potential ``barriers'' and other blockages should be identified and eliminated to
promote co-operation and team working between all employees (including
Table VII. management). Such barriers may be hierarchical, functional, geographical, personality
Elements of best clashes
practice associated 6.8 A mechanism should be established to identify and regularly review training and
with focusing on development needs of all staff. Use of the Investors in People standard is
employees recommended for this purpose
7. Focus on critical processes Continuous
improvement
7.1 All major business processes should be identified and documented (using flow charts
or process mapping techniques)
7.2 The following should be identified for each process:
.
An owner
.
All employees involved 495
.
Process customers
.
Process suppliers
.
Activities
.
Resources
.
Performance indicators
.
Measurement mechanisms
.
Feedback mechanisms
.
Review points
7.3 Processes should be regularly reviewed to identify their contribution to the
achievement of the organisation's aims, objectives and critical success factors. The
critical processes should be identified (Links to 9.1)
7.4 The needs and expectations of all those involved in the process should be identified
(e.g. process customers and suppliers)
7.5 ``Best practice'' should be identified (internally or externally) against which to
benchmark the processes
7.6 All non-value adding activities should be identified and eliminated Table VIII.
7.7 Self-assessment techniques (e.g. european business excellence model or Baldrige Elements of best
Award criteria) should be used to promote a holistic view of the organisation against practice associated
which to continuously measure and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of all with focusing on
processes (Links to 4.3 and 9.9) critical processes
8.0 Quality management systems
8.1 Best business practice should be standardised in a documented quality management

system which also meet the requirements of BS EN ISO 9000
8.2 The quality management system should be kept simple with the avoidance of
unnecessary bureaucracy, overcomplicated procedures and excessive paperwork. It Table IX.
should be flexible and appropriate to the needs of the organisation Elements of best
8.3 Registration for the quality management system with a reputable UKAS accredited practice associated
certification body is recommended in order to benefit from regular external and with quality
independent assessments and advice on how to continually improve management systems
Senior management commitment and involvement

Evidence of senior management commitment and involvement was sought
through investigating the existence of leadership and direction-setting
capability within the organisations, their propensity for communicating with
staff, and whether they recognised successes. Positive responses to these
questions are illustrated in Figure 5.
When asked if senior management had developed at least one of a vision,
mission or critical success factor, 94 percent of the organisations answered in
IJQRM 9. Measurement and feedback systems
16,5
9.1 Appropriate performance indicators which relate to all critical success factors and
business processes at organisational, team and individual levels, should be identified
and regularly reviewed (Links to 7.3)
9.2 Regular and timely measurement of performance against the performance indicators
496 (see 9.1) should be carried out
9.3 All appropriate management and employees should be made aware of the results of
measurements to encourage on-going improvement
9.4 Too much focus on just financial indicators should be avoided
9.5 Performance trends should be identified and appropriate action taken
9.6 Successes, as well as poor results, should be highlighted and fed back to employees
Table X. 9.7 A proactive approach to identifying problems should be taken to avoid reliance on
Elements of best customer complaints and inspection systems (e.g. improved internal auditing systems)
practice associated
with measurement and 9.8 Internal auditing should identify and highlight best practices as well as nonconformity
feedback systems 9.9 Self-assessment techniques should be used (Links to 4.2 and 7.7)
10. The learning organisation
10.1 Regular briefings should be held to enable both management and employees to share
experiences and progress on projects, best practices, successes and failures
10.2 The outcomes from training courses and other developmental experiences of
Table XI. employees should be evaluated and fed back
Elements of best 10.3 Benchmarking techniques (internal and external) should be used to compare the
practice associated organisation's activities against other departments'/organisations' best practices
with the learning
organisation 10.4 Organisational and individual learning should be actively promoted
100
80
60
40
20
0
1 2 3 4 5
KEY TO QUESTIONS 1 TO 5:
Figure 5. 1. Have senior management developed a vision, mission or critical success factors for the organisation?
Percentage of positive 2. Is there a quality policy?
responses to question 3. Does the quality policy include a commitment to continuous improvement?
1-5 4. Do senior managers make themselves available to speak to staff?
5. Do senior managers recognise success?
the affirmative. The organisations all recognised the need for, and importance Continuous
of, having strategic aims to identify the purpose of the organisation and its improvement
future direction. Few of the organisations (22 percent) had identified critical
success factors, which was seen as an area of weakness.
Respondents were asked how their visions and missions had been
communicated to staff. A wide range of ways of communicating to staff were
used but 17 percent of the organisations considered that the information had 497
not been well communicated.
Other comments made by the organisations indicated that 67 percent had
linked their vision/mission/long term strategic objectives into business plans
and lower level business unit objectives, and some into individual staff work
objectives by using the Investors in People standard.

Most of the organisations (89 percent) had a quality policy and 67 percent
said that this included a commitment to continuous improvement.
When asked if senior management made itself available to speak to staff, the
majority of the organisations (83 percent) thought that it did. In each case a
range of examples of actions taken by senior management as a result of their
listening to staff was given.
Most of the organisations recognised the importance of senior management
keeping in touch with staff and some saw this as something which needed
further development. One organisation said that ``Senior management walk
around quite a lot and observe. Formal systems won't tell them how good
quality is, they need to get out there''.
In communicating successes to staff and expressing recognition, no one
approach was evident as preferred, but the means of recognition was usually
tangible in terms of gifts, monetary awards, letters of praise, certificates,
publications in a newsletter etc.
Respondents were invited to make any other comments about senior
management's leadership role. Comments included:
Senior management must support whatever they put it. Accept the standards that people
must work to. Any differences between them must not show (a united management team).
They must have belief and common goals, commitment and demonstration of this. Reviewing
performance is easier said than done. There should be discipline and a clear understanding of
everyone's role and how they fit in.
Senior management must be committed to making continuous improvement work.
An organisation is determined by its management, i.e. those at the top.
Leadership
This criterion concerns the leadership and active commitment to continuous
improvement by managers at all levels.
Respondents were asked whether they thought that all managers
demonstrated personal involvement in quality improvement. Only 39 percent
answered affirmatively. The negative responses said that:
. there were problems with middle managers;
IJQRM . management did not take an active enough role in educating staff;
16,5 . some managers were struggling with, and not keen to enforce change;
. managers were not committed to continuous improvement because of
lack of commitment and direction from the board;
. quality was seen by some managers as someone else's responsibility,
498 typically the QC department or quality manager.
Given the importance of management leadership and the need for visible
commitment to quality improvement, the respondents were asked if they
thought that managers acted as role models and led by example; 67 percent
thought that managers did lead by example. One organisation said they
were looking at introducing 3608 appraisals to fully identify management

and staff perceptions of one another. Another organisation thought its
managers did not show any interest in how they were perceived by staff!
The elements of best practice in relation to leadership are given in Table III.
Stakeholder focus
The organisations were found to be positive and flexible in seeking and using
information from customers to determine both their long and shorter-term
strategies. When asked what steps were taken to understand and respond to
the needs of customers, the majority of organisations (56 percent) undertook
customer surveys (postal, telephone and in person) and market research
activities. Other organisations relied on feedback from buyers, personal
contacts at director level, and feedback from customer support/service
processes. One organisation used a sophisticated computer system to log all
contacts with customers and highlight when specific customers should be
contacted.
Respondents were asked to comment upon how the level of customers'
satisfaction was measured. Customer complaints were cited as the main
mechanism. The organisations demonstrated proactivity in identifying who
their customers were, and what their needs and expectations were, although no
specific examples of best practice were easily identifiable.
Some organisations pointed out the importance of focusing on the needs of
all stakeholders, not just customers, but also employees, suppliers, share-
holders, the community and others. This helped to identify a weakness in the
model discussed earlier.
The elements of best practice associated with the criterion for stakeholder
focus are given in Table IV.
Integration of continuous improvement activities

The more successful organisations in terms of achieving integration of
continuous improvement activities appeared to be those which had used the
recognised frameworks (e.g. the business excellence model, Baldrige Award,
etc.) to assess and improve their current quality status.
This criterion is strongly linked to criterion 7, focus on critical processes, Continuous
which is discussed below. improvement
The elements of best practice associated with this criterion are given in
Table V.
Culture for continuous improvement

Of the organisations, 72 percent thought that the responsibility for quality was 499
seen as belonging to everyone. The positive responses given to questions
relating to the organisations' culture are given in Figure 6.
The majority of respondents (80 percent) thought that the working culture
within their organisation did encourage continuous improvement and this had
been influenced by:

. open communications;
. spreading the word and raising staff awareness and understanding; and
. training people in quality concepts.
When asked if they thought that staff were encouraged to find new ways of
doing things, 72 percent of organisations answered affirmatively; 50 percent
cited ideas systems/suggestion schemes as the main vehicle, and 28 percent by
the use of workshops and focus groups.
However, when it came to making mistakes, it appears that blame and
punishment are still the order of the day. The following are some of the
comments made:
The punishment fits the crime.
Its ``shame and blame''.
We punish mistakes and don't learn from them.
One organisation said that they were using the internal audit process to
actively encourage managers to be more supportive and learn from mistakes.
100
80
60
40
20
0
1 2 3 4 5
KEY TO QUESTIONS:
Q1: Does the working culture of the organisation/service encourage continuous improvement?
Q2: Are staff encouraged to find new ways of doing things? Figure 6.
Q3: Do managers support staff by not punishing mistakes but by encouraging learning from them? Percentage of positive
Q4: When things go wrong, is there a preventive approach to errors? responses
Q5: Are there open communication networks across the organisation?
IJQRM Another organisation used ``league tables'' to identify and publicise best
16,5 practice.
When asked whether there was a preventive approach to errors, most of the
external organisations talked about ``fire-fighting'' and ``quick fixes''.
Respondents were asked if they thought there were open communication
networks across the organisation; 78 percent of organisations answered
500 affirmatively. Examples of mechanisms for communication included:
. company newsletter (50 percent);
. improvement groups, teams, team meetings (33 percent);
. use of e-mail (22 percent);
. staff surveys (11 percent).

The elements of best practice associated with this criterion are given in Table VI.
Focusing on employees
This criterion concerns four specific areas:
(1) employee involvement;
(2) employee empowerment;
(3) team work and establishing improvement teams;
(4) training and development.
Employee involvement
In this area, 83 percent of organisations said that staff actively participated in
identifying improvements and making changes. The following examples were
given of how staff were involved:
. performance reviews and annual appraisals;
. ideas systems/suggestion schemes;
. project teams and focus groups;
. training.
All of the organisations indicated that staff were asked for their ideas and
contributions, giving the following examples of how this was achieved:
. ideas systems/suggestion schemes;
. specific requests; and
. involvement in project work, improvement groups and team meetings.
When asked if there were any other ways in which staff could be more involved
in determining the quality and direction of their own work, responses included:
. through staff appraisals;
. encouraging positive process improvement;
. more product improvement meetings which included shop floor Continuous
workers; improvement
. more quality training and awareness;
. more general training;
. participation in improvement programmes;
. team working; 501
. spending more time with staff at delivery points;
. bringing depot staff into the centre more often;
. moving people around departments to learn.
Empowerment
Few organisations thought that their staff were empowered (only 28 percent).
The nature of the business and operational constraints were largely seen as the
reason for limited control by staff.
Teams and team working

All of the organisations used teams for special projects or for problem-solving
purposes. There were on-going improvement and cross-functional teams and
focus groups as well as ad hoc project groups.
Respondents were asked whether they thought that people freely
communicated and co-operated across functional boundaries and at all levels to get
the job done; 83 percent answered affirmatively. Negative responses included:
. a lack of direction by senior management;
. insufficient knowledge of each others' jobs;
. too many old scores/barriers.
Training and development

All of the organisations said that the training and development needs of staff
were identified. When asked how this was achieved, eight of the organisations
had implemented the Investors in People standard, four others relied on
appraisal systems and another said that this was part of their quality
management system. Other respondents said:
. there were on-going meetings with staff;
. secondments were encouraged; and
. career development programmes were in place.
The elements of best practice associated with this criterion are given in Table VII.
Focusing on critical processes

Most (96 percent) of the organisations had identified and agreed their main
processes and for many these were documented in the form of flow charts. The
IJQRM organisations that appeared to be the more successful in this respect were those
16,5 who had used the business excellence model for self-assessment purposes.
Comments made included:
We have identified the important processes that deliver the business objectives. There are
process maps for all main processes and these are based on the Deming Cycle.
502 Processes were identified within a matrix against business goals. The business excellence
model was used for measurement and assessment purposes.
The elements of best practice associated with this criterion are given in Table
VIII.
Quality management system (QMS)

Fifteen of the organisations had documented quality management systems
for all or part of their operations and the majority (10) were registered to BS
EN ISO 9000. A further two organisations were currently developing a
QMS. The remaining organisation had documented and flow-charted its
procedures.
The elements of best practice associated with this criterion are given in
Table IX.
Measurement and feedback systems

All of the organisations confirmed that performance measurement
mechanisms were established and areas for improvement identified. When
asked how quality problems were identified and diagnosed, the following
examples were given: through customer complaints and internal audits, by
management and staff, when things went wrong, through inspection
systems, at performance reviews, the number of rejects, at meetings,
through customer satisfaction indexes, through measuring costs, use of the
business excellence model, through staff surveys, by flowcharting
processes and at quality workshops.
Areas for improvement were similarly identified through:
. customer complaints;
. audits;
. use of cross functional teams;
. use of self-assessment models;
. staff surveys;
. staff appraisals;
. identified by managers and staff;
. quality improvement programmes;
. use of flowcharting of processes.
While all of the organisations responded positively when asked if performance Continuous
measurement mechanisms were established, some also highlighted concerns improvement
including:
Measures are not sufficiently based on quality. More geared to delivery and costs. You get
what you measure.
We are less good at non-financial measures and are actively trying to change that. 503
The elements of best practice associated with this criterion are given in Table X.
The learning organisation
When asked whether there where mechanisms in place to capture the learning
and experiences of individuals and teams 61 percent of respondents answered

``yes''.
The best practices outlined by the organisations included:
Management team share projects. There is a drive through the continuous improvement co-
ordinator and business unit process representatives. There are regular meetings.
Through the focus teams this helps communications and learning. Also through training
courses and company briefings.
There is internal benchmarking informally across divisions.
Respondents were asked how the results of the organisation's performance

were used to continually improve performance. Comments made by some
organisations included:
By analysing results and at meetings of business groups.
Through business planning.
The change facilitator role in sharing big wins which motivates other teams. There are shared
experiences at management team level.
Others also said there were monthly reviews, briefings and board reports in
order to share information experiences. The elements of best practice
associated with this criterion are given in Table XI.
The model for continuous improvement revisited
The model for continuous improvement (given in Figure 4) was revisited. It
was concluded that far greater emphasis should be placed on the role of senior
management and other managers than is given within the recognised self-
assessment models (e.g. the business excellence model and the Baldrige Award
criteria). The revised model is given at Figure 7.
Far from being an enabler (as represented in the business excellence model),
the role of management, particularly senior management, is seen as a
fundamental driver, together with:
. stakeholder focus;
. measurement and feedback; and
. learning from results.
IJQRM DRIVERS ENABLERS RESULTS
16,5
MANAGEMENT Results:
Culture for
504 Continuous
Improvement Organisational
Role of Senior and
Management Innovation
Team
Leadership by all
managers Employee Individual
Focus
Focus on
Stakeholder Critical
Focus Processes
Standardise
Measurement Best Practices/
and Quality
Feedback Management
System
Learning from Integration of

Figure 7. Continuous Continuous
Improvement Improvement
Revised model for Results Activities
continuous
improvement
It is these drivers that will ensure that continuous improvement is not only
achieved, but sustained over time. The drivers are the energy force within the
model and if they are lacking, no matter how well the other criteria within the
model have been addressed, there will be no longer-term improvements.
The enablers within the model are the foundations that must be in place if
continuous improvement is to be achieved or commenced in the first place. The
enablers include:
. the culture for continuous improvement and innovation;
. employee focus;
. integration of continuous improvement; Continuous
. focus on critical processes and standardisation of best practices in a improvement
quality management system.
Many organisations view results in financial terms only. Within this model, it
is concluded that results should also be viewed in terms of organisational, team
and individual performance. 505
While the model is represented in terms of drivers, enablers, and results, it
provides an integrative and holistic model for analysing the current status of
continuous improvement within an organisation.
Conclusions
The research work has demonstrated that the achievement of quality and
continuous improvement is far from easy. There are many complex variables at
play within an organisation and it is essential that there is a robust framework
against which to assess and measure performance. There must be a planned
and integrated approach otherwise quality will continue to be seen as an `àdd
on'' and very little improvement will be achieved.
The survey findings highlighted that the organisations using the recognised
self-assessment models appeared to perform well in terms of process
improvement, integration, and measurement and feedback, but less well in
regard to the other key criteria that have been identified.
Continuous improvement requires continuous management but senior
managers have still to learn the importance of their role in ceaselessly
driving the improvement cause. Focus on keeping the business aligned with
stakeholder requirements, measuring performance and learning from
results also contribute to the driving force for improvement. The
underpinning foundations are provided through creating a culture for
innovation, involving and focusing on employees, identifying the critical
processes for achieving success, and integrating improvement activities
throughout the organisation.
Use of the model advocated by this study, together with the associated
elements of best practice, is seen as preparatory for, and complementary to, the
more complex models (business excellence model and Baldrige Award) which
are useful where organisations have already established the foundations and a
culture for improvement and wish to stretch themselves yet further.
Further work is being carried out to expand on this research and refine the
model to meet the needs of a wider range of organisations.
References
Berk, J. and S. (1993), Total Quality Management, Implementing Continuous Improvement,
Sterling.
Bessant, J. and Caffyn, S. (1997), ``High involvement innovation through continuous
improvement'', International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 14 No. 1, special
edition, pp. 7-28.
IJQRM Bounds, G., Yorks, L., Adams, M. and Ranney, G. (1994), Beyond Total Quality Management
toward the Emerging Paradigm, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
16,5 Dale, B.G. and Boaden, R.J. (1994), `À generic framework for managing quality improvement'',
``Managing Quality'', Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Ch. 5.
Davies, J., Khodabocus, F. and Obray, C. (1996), ``Self-assessment: a path to business excellence'',
Quality World Technical Supplement, March, pp. 4-11.
506 Dyason, M.D. and Kaye, M.M. (1995), `Ìs there life after total quality management? (II)'', Quality
World, January.
Huda, F. (1992), Kaizen: the Understanding and Application of Continuous Improvement,
Technical Publications.
Imai, M. (1986), Kaizen, The Kaizen Institute.
Kaye, M.M. and Dyason, M.D. (1995), ``The fifth era'', The TQM Magazine, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 33-7.
Lascelles, D.M. and Peacock, R. (1996), Self-assessment for Business Excellence, McGraw Hill,
New York, NY.
National Institute for Standards and Technology (1998), Malcolm Baldrige Criteria for 1998.
Oakland, J. (1993), Total Quality Management, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
Robson, C. (1993), The Real World, Blackwell.
This article has been cited by:
1. Jan Lenning, Ida Gremyr. 2017. Making internal audits business-relevant. Total Quality Management &
Business Excellence 19, 1-16. [CrossRef]
2. MaJie Jie Ma jie.ma@northumbria.ac.uk http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5575-2216 LinZhibin Zhibin Lin
yourforest@hotmail.com LauChi Keung Chi Keung Lau chi.lau@northumbria.ac.uk Newcastle Business
School, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK . 2017. Prioritising the enablers for the
successful implementation of Kaizen in China. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management
34:4, 549-568. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
3. ErikssonHenrik Henrik Eriksson GremyrIda Ida Gremyr BergquistBjarne Bjarne Bergquist
GarvareRickard Rickard Garvare FundinAnders Anders Fundin WiklundHkan Hkan Wiklund
WesterMichael Michael Wester SrqvistLars Lars Srqvist Department of Technology Management and
Economics, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden Department of Quality Technology
and Management, Lule University of Technology, Lule, Sweden School of Innovation and Design,
Mlardalen University, Eskilstuna, Sweden Mid Sweden University, stersund, Sweden Swedish Institute
for Quality, Gteborg, Sweden Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden . 2016. Exploring
quality challenges and the validity of excellence models. International Journal of Operations & Production
Management 36:10, 1201-1221. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
4. David Hansen, Niels Mller. 2016. Conceptualizing Dynamic Capabilities in Lean Production: What are
They and How Do They Develop?. Engineering Management Journal 28:4, 194-208. [CrossRef]
5. Madhav Sinha Abdullah Alhaqbani Department of Operations and Systems Management, University of
Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK Deborah M Reed Department of Operations and Systems Management,
University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK Barbara M Savage Department of Operations and Systems
Management, University of Portsmouth, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK Jana Ries
Department of Operations and Systems Management, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK . 2016.
The impact of middle management commitment on improvement initiatives in public organisations.
Business Process Management Journal 22:5, 924-938. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
6. HowiesonJanet Janet Howieson LawleyMeredith Meredith Lawley HastingsKathleen Kathleen Hastings
Centre of Excellence of Science, Seafood and Health, Curtin University, Bentley, Australia School of
Business, University of the Sunshine Coast, Sippy Downs, Australia . 2016. Value chain analysis: an iterative
and relational approach for agri-food chains. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 21:3,
352-362. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
7. Rodrigo Valio Dominguez Gonzalez School of Applied Science, University of Campinas, Limeira, Brazil
Manoel Fernando Martins Department of Production Engineering, So Carlos Federal University, So
Carlos , Brazil . 2016. Capability for continuous improvement. The TQM Journal 28:2, 250-274. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
8. Pramila Gamage, Nihal P. Jayamaha, Nigel P. Grigg. 2016. Acceptance of Taguchi's Quality Philosophy and
Practice by Lean practitioners in apparel manufacturing. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence
1-17. [CrossRef]
9. Mohd Ghazali Maarof, Fatimah Mahmud. 2016. A Review of Contributing Factors and Challenges in
Implementing Kaizen in Small and Medium Enterprises. Procedia Economics and Finance 35, 522-531.
[CrossRef]
10. Amine Sakouhi, Sylvie Nadeau. 2016. Integration of Occupational Health and Safety into Lean
Manufacturing: Quebec Aeronautics Case Study. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management
06:11, 1019-1031. [CrossRef]
11. Wiljeana J. Glover, Jennifer A. Farris, Eileen M. Van Aken. 2015. The relationship between continuous
improvement and rapid improvement sustainability. International Journal of Production Research 53:13,
4068-4086. [CrossRef]
12. Terry Sloan, Anneke Fitzgerald, Kathryn J. Hayes, Zoe Radnor, Suzanne Robinson and Amrik Sohal S.
Al-Balushi College of Economics and Political Science, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Sultanate of
Oman A.S. Sohal Department of Management, Monash University, Caulfield East, Australia P.J. Singh
Department of Management and Marketing, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia A. Al Hajri
College of Economics and Political Science, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman Y.M. Al
Farsi Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman R. Al Abri Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat,
Sultanate of Oman . 2014. Readiness factors for lean implementation in healthcare settings a literature
review. Journal of Health Organization and Management 28:2, 135-153. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
13. Jorge L. Garca, Aid A. Maldonado, Alejandro Alvarado, Denisse G. Rivera. 2014. Human critical
success factors for kaizen and its impacts in industrial performance. The International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology 70:9-12, 2187-2198. [CrossRef]
14. Jorge L. Garca, Denisse G. Rivera, Alejandro Alvarado Iniesta. 2013. Critical success factors for
Kaizen implementation in manufacturing industries in Mexico. The International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology 68:1-4, 537-545. [CrossRef]
15. Wiljeana J. GloverLean Advancement Initiative, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge,
Massachusetts, USA WenHsing LiuDepartment of Industrial Engineering, Texas Tech University,
Lubbock, Texas, USA Jennifer A. FarrisDepartment of Industrial Engineering, Texas Tech University,
Lubbock, Texas, USA Eileen M. Van AkenGrado Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering,
Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA. 2013. Characteristics of established kaizen event programs: an
empirical study. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 33:9, 1166-1201. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
16. Henry J. Quesada-Pineda, Johanna Madrigal. 2013. Sustaining Continuous Improvement: A Longitudinal
and Regional Study. International Journal of Engineering Business Management 5, 43. [CrossRef]
17. Martin Tanco, Ricardo Mateo, Javier Santos, Carmen Jaca, Elisabeth Viles. 2012. On the relationship
between continuous improvement programmes and their effect on quality defects: An automotive case
study. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 23:3-4, 277-290. [CrossRef]
18. Julio J. Garcia-Sabater, Juan A. Marin-Garcia, M. Rosario Perello-Marin. 2012. Is implementation of
continuous improvement possible? An evolutionary model of enablers and inhibitors. Human Factors and
Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries 22:2, 99-112. [CrossRef]
19. Carmen JacaTECNUN Escuela de Ingenieros, University of Navarra, San Sebastian, Spain Elisabeth
VilesTECNUN Escuela de Ingenieros, University of Navarra, San Sebastian, Spain Ricardo MateoSchool
of Economics & Business Administration, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain Javier SantosTECNUN
Escuela de Ingenieros, University of Navarra, San Sebastian, Spain. 2012. Components of sustainable
improvement systems: theory and practice. The TQM Journal 24:2, 142-154. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
20. Pedro C. OprimeSo Carlos Federal University, So Carlos, Brazil Glauco Henrique de Sousa MendesSo
Carlos Federal University, So Carlos, Brazil Mrcio Lopes PimentaUberlndia Federal University,
Uberlndia, Brazil. 2011. Continuous improvement: critical factors in Brazilian industrial companies.
International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 61:1, 69-92. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
21. Manuel F. SurezBarrazaEGADE Business School, Mxico, Tecnolgico de Monterrey, Monterrey,
Mxico Juan RamisPujolOperations Management and Innovation Department, ESADE Ramon Llull
University at Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain Laoucine KerbacheIndustrial Engineering and Operations
Research, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA. 2011. Thoughts on kaizen and its
evolution. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma 2:4, 288-308. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
22. Maneesh Kumar, Jiju Antony, M.K. Tiwari. 2011. Six Sigma implementation framework for SMEs a
roadmap to manage and sustain the change. International Journal of Production Research 49:18, 5449-5467.
[CrossRef]
23. Wiljeana J. Glover, Jennifer A. Farris, Eileen M. Van Aken, Toni L. Doolen. 2011. Critical success factors
for the sustainability of Kaizen event human resource outcomes: An empirical study. International Journal
of Production Economics 132:2, 197-213. [CrossRef]
24. Kathleen M. Burke, Sharon Donahue Hellwig. 2011. Education in High-Performing Hospitals: Using the
Baldrige Framework to Demonstrate Positive Outcomes. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing
42:7, 299-305. [CrossRef]
25. Milena AliMercator, d.d., Ljubljana, Slovenia Borut RusjanFaculty of Economics, University of
Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia. 2011. Managerial relevance of internal audit. The TQM Journal 23:3,
26. Jess Garca-Arca, J. C. Prado-Prado. 2011. Systematic personnel participation for logistics improvement:
A case study. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries 21:2, 209-223.
[CrossRef]
27. Tila Morris, Susan M. Ogden. 2011. Funder demands for quality management in the non-profit sector:
challenges and responses in a non-profit infrastructure network. Public Money & Management 31:2,
99-106. [CrossRef]
28. Kathleen M. Burke, Sharon Donahue Hellwig. 2011. Education in High-Performing Hospitals: Using the
Baldrige Framework to Demonstrate Positive Outcomes. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing
. [CrossRef]
29. Eileen M. Van AkenGrado Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg,
Virginia, USA Jennifer A. FarrisDepartment of Industrial Engineering, Texas Tech University, Lubbock,
Texas, USA Wiljeana J. GloverLean Advancement Initiative, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA Geert LetensDepartment of Economics, Management and Leadership,
Royal Military Academy, Brussels, Belgium. 2010. A framework for designing, managing, and improving
Kaizen event programs. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 59:7, 641-667.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
30. Birasnav MDepartment of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee, India
Rangnekar SDepartment of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee,
India. 2010. Knowledge management structure and human capital development in Indian manufacturing
industries. Business Process Management Journal 16:1, 57-75. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
31. Juan A. Marin-Garcia. 2010. Identificacin de los facilitadores clave de la mejora continua y su relacin
con las conductas. WPOM-Working Papers on Operations Management 1:1, 6. [CrossRef]
32. K.A.S.P. KaluarachchiDepartment of Management and Organization Studies, Faculty of Management and
Finance, University of Colombo, Colombo, Sri Lanka. 2010. Organizational culture and total quality
management practices: a Sri Lankan case. The TQM Journal 22:1, 41-55. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
33. Rafael Henrique Palma Lima, Luiz Cesar Ribeiro Carpinetti. 2010. Proposal of a method for performance
measurement system design and implementation of a software application in SMEs. International Journal
of Business Performance Management 12:2, 182. [CrossRef]
34. Ping Yung, Brenda Yip. 2010. Construction quality in China during transition: A review of literature and
empirical examination. International Journal of Project Management 28:1, 79-91. [CrossRef]
35. Iaki Heras, Frederic Marimon, Mart Casadess. 2009. Impacto competitivo de las herramientas para la
gestin de la calidad. Cuadernos de Economa y Direccin de la Empresa 12:41, 7-35. [CrossRef]
36. Toni L. DoolenSchool of Mechanical, Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, Oregon State
University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA Eileen M. Van AkenEnterprise Engineering Research Laboratory,
Grado Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA
Jennifer A. FarrisDepartment of Industrial Engineering, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas,
USA June M. WorleySchool of Mechanical, Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, Oregon State
University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA Jeremy HuweProject Management Office, Providence Health Systems,
Oregon Center for Clinical Excellence, Portland, Oregon, USA. 2008. Kaizen events and organizational
performance: a field study. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 57:8,
37. Katsuki AokiFaculty of Economics, Kanto Gakuin University, Japan Cardiff Business School, Cardiff
University, Cardiff, UK. 2008. Transferring Japanese kaizen activities to overseas plants in China.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management 28:6, 518-539. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
38. Karen J. FryerCaledonian Business School, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK Jiju
AntonyDepartment of DMEM, Strathclyde Institute for Operations Management, Glasgow, UK Alex
DouglasLiverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK. 2007. Critical success factors of continuous
improvement in the public sector. The TQM Magazine 19:5, 497-517. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
39. Frances Jrgensen, Harry Boer, Bjrge Timenes Laugen. 2006. CI Implementation: An Empirical Test
of the CI Maturity Model. Creativity and Innovation Management, ahead of print061009034905001-???.
[CrossRef]
40. N. Mohan Das GandhiKumaraguru College of Technology, Coimbatore, India V. SelladuraiCoimbatore
Institute of Technology, Coimbatore, India P. SanthiAvinashilingam, Deemed University, Coimbatore,
India. 2006. Green productivity indexing. International Journal of Productivity and Performance
41. Albert P.C. ChanThe Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China Francis
K.W. WongThe Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China Patrick T.I.
LamThe Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China. 2006. Assessing
quality relationships in public housing. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 23:8,
42. Jozef Loermans, Dieter Fink. 2005. How organisations evaluate their knowledge management projects: a
meta-study of the period 19922002. Knowledge Management Research & Practice 3:3, 125-135. [CrossRef]
43. Nicola BatemanLean Enterprise Research Centre, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK. 2005.
Sustainability: the elusive element of process improvement. International Journal of Operations &
Production Management 25:3, 261-276. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
44. Eddie W. L. Cheng, Heng Li. 2004. Development of a Practical Model of Partnering for Construction
Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 130:6, 790-798. [CrossRef]
45. Eddie W.L. ChengDepartment of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
Hong Kong Heng LiDepartment of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
Hong Kong Peter LoveDepartment of Information Systems, Edith Cowan University, Australia Zahir
IraniDepartment of Information Systems and Computing, Brunel University, UK. 2004. A learning culture
for strategic partnering in construction. Construction Innovation 4:1, 53-65. [Abstract] [PDF]
46. Mary KeatingLecturer, Department of Languages, Tourism and Sports Studies, Waterford Institute
of Technology, Waterford, Ireland Denis HarringtonLecturer, Business School, Waterford Institute of
Technology, Waterford, Ireland. 2003. The challenges of implementing quality in the Irish hotel industry.
Journal of European Industrial Training 27:9, 441-453. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
47. 2003. Making quality count. Strategic Direction 19:3, 16-19. [Abstract] [Full Text]
48. Nick RichLean Enterprise Research Centre, Cardiff Business School, Cardiff, UK Nicola BatemanLean
Enterprise Research Centre, Cardiff Business School, Cardiff, UK. 2003. Companies perceptions of
inhibitors and enablers for process improvement activities. International Journal of Operations & Production
49. Mary KeatingMary Keating is a Lecturer at, Waterford Institute of Technology, Waterford, Ireland.Denis
HarringtonDenis Harrington is a Lecturer at, Waterford Institute of Technology, Waterford, Ireland..
2002. The challenges of implementing quality in the Irish hotel industry: a review. Managing Service
Quality: An International Journal 12:5, 303-315. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
50. Nicola BatemanLean Enterprise Research Centre, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, and Arthur
DavidSMMT Industry Forum, Birmingham, UK. 2002. Process improvement programmes: a model for
assessing sustainability. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 22:5, 515-526.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
51. Stanislav KarapetrovicDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta,
Canada Walter WillbornFaculty of Management, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
2001. Audit and selfassessment in quality management: comparison and compatibility. Managerial
Auditing Journal 16:6, 366-377. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
52. Kimberly Lenease King Jupiter, Alethea Fletcher Hampton, Thurman E Webb, Darreon
GreerStrengthening HBCU Colleges of Education for the Current Climate: 237-260. [CrossRef]

Continuous improvement essential criteria

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Continuous improvement essential criteria

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management

Continuous improvement: the ten essential criteria

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

So why is continuous improvement important?

uncertainty and unpredictability. To meet these challenges, a fifth quality era

The use of self-assessment to achieve continuous improvement

Figure 1. Resources Impact on Society

(3) Information and analysis seen as critical to the effective management

Customer and Market Focused

. focus management attention;

Critical Success Factors Aims People People

DRIVERS ENABLERS RESULTS

490 ROLE OF SENIOR

and foundations which had to be present before improvement could be

interviewed. Using a semi-structured questionnaire, the interviews allowed an

Size Nature of business Business sector

Large (>1,000 employees) 10 Manufacturing 8 Private 14

Elements of best practice

None of the organisations interviewed displayed excellent performance in all of

1. Senior management commitment and involvement

should be considered managers

3.1 The organisation's major stakeholders should be identified, e.g.

4. Integration of continuous improvement

6.1 Management should continually encourage staff to actively participate in identifying

8.0 Quality management systems

8.1 Best business practice should be standardised in a documented quality management

Senior management commitment and involvement

10. The learning organisation

objectives by using the Investors in People standard.

were looking at introducing 3608 appraisals to fully identify management

Integration of continuous improvement activities

Culture for continuous improvement

been influenced by:

. staff surveys (11 percent).

Teams and team working

Training and development

Focusing on critical processes

Quality management system (QMS)

Measurement and feedback systems

and experiences of individuals and teams 61 percent of respondents answered

Respondents were asked how the results of the organisation's performance

Learning from Integration of

Potrebbero piacerti anche