Sunteți pe pagina 1din 22

Strategic Quality and Systems Management

Bugga Construction Ltd

Student Name:

Student ID:

Dated:
TABLE OF CONTENTS

TASK – 1: ROLE OF OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT IN ORGANISATIONS 1


1.1. OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT 1
1.2. STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES 3
1.2.1. QUALITY 3
1.2.2. SPEED 4
1.2.3. DEPENDABILITY 5
1.2.4. FLEXIBILITY 6
1.2.5. COST 7
1.3. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT 8

TASK – 2: IMPORTANCE OF MANAGING QUALITY 9


2.1. HISTORY OF QUALITY MOVEMENT 9
2.2. MODEL OF QUALITY 10
2.2.1. SIX SIGMA 10
2.2.2. SERVICE QUALITY MODEL 11
2.2. MONITORING ORGANISATIONAL PERFORMANCE 13

TASK – 3: PLANNING STRATEGIC QUALITY CHANGE 13


3.1. GAP ANALYSIS 14
3.2. DEGREE OF CHANGE 15
3.3. EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION 15
3.4. RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS 15
3.4.1. TECHNOLOGY 15
3.4.2. TRANSPORTATION 15
3.4.3. EMPLOYEE TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT 16
3.4.4. QUALITY SYSTEMS 16
3.4.5. QUALITY CIRCLE 16

TASK – 4: IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION OF SQC 16


4.1. QUALITY CHANGE IMPLEMENTATION 16
4.2. QUALITY CULTURE 17

REFERENCES 18
TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Operations Function in different Organisations___________________________________1


Figure 1.2: Relationship between Operations Function and Other Functions_____________________2
Figure 1.3: Quality means differently in distinct Operations__________________________________4
Figure 1.4: Speed means differently in distinct Operations___________________________________5
Figure 1.5: Flexibility means differently in distinct Operations________________________________6
Figure 1.6: Cost means differently in distinct Operations____________________________________7
Figure 1.7: External effects of the five performance objectives________________________________8
Figure 2.1: Service Quality Conceptual Model____________________________________________12
Figure 2.2: GAP Analysis Report_______________________________________________________14
Task – 1: Role of Operations Management in Organisations

1.1. Operations Management

It is important to manage operations within an organisation. Operations management is


concerned with development of products and services on the basis of which the whole society
can function smoothly (Wild, 2003). Operations management refers to the activities that are
undertaken by organisations in order to manage their resources so that they can produce their
products and services and then deliver them to their clients. All such activities have
‘operations function’ related to them that are utilised by organisations, even though not all
organisations call them with the same name (Slack et al., 2010). These operations are
controlled and managed by individuals who, in normal sense, are known as operations
managers.

Organisations, in recent era, have come to recognise and understand the necessity of
managing their operations in order to work efficiently (Mishra, 2009). All organisations, big
or small, manufacture, produce, and offer some kind of product and services mix, irrespective
of it being for-profit or not-for-profit, private or public, and working in any sector of business
(Wild, 2003). This means that they need to have customer satisfaction for which they require
all their departments and their functionality to be effective and efficient.

Figure 1.1: Operations Function in different Organisations


(Source: Slack et al., 2010, p. 1)

1
The ‘cliché’ that operations management only refer to managing ‘operations function’ is
wrong. Management of operations is done everywhere let it be Human Resources, Marketing,
or Finance, and even though the managers of these departments of called managers of
respective departments, they still manage process and deal with customers (Slack et al.,
2010). These customers can be internal to the organisation or in the external environment
(Mishra, 2009)t. The general flow of operations function is shown in figure 1.1 that displays
flow of operations from input resources to out of products and services to the customers.

Figure 1.2: Relationship between Operations Function and Other Functions


(Source: Slack et al., 2010, p. 6)

Based on the discussion above, it can be stated that Operations Management in concerned
with design, operation, and control of processes of transformation that are utilised to convert
transformed and transforming resources such as raw materials and human resources into
services or products that can be offered to the potential customers of the organisation.

2
Moreover, it also provides information that all units within an organisation are a small-scale
organisation themselves with their own customers so they produce something for them hence
there is a relationship between the operations function and other supportive and core
functions within an organisation (see figure 1.2). Thus, all operations within an organisation,
irrespective of which department of the organisation they belong to, can be modelled as seen
in figure 1.3, having inputs, some kind of transformation, and then output (see figure 1.1).
Furthermore, as has been stated by Slack et al. (2010), all operations are part of a larger
system of network of supply (see figure 1.2), individually providing contributions in order to
satisfy needs of the organisation’s end-customers.

1.2. Strategic Objectives

It is stated by Slack et al. (2010) that “it is no exaggeration to view operations management
as being able to either ‘make or break’ any business. This is not just because the operations
function is large and, in most businesses, represents the bulk of its assets and the majority of
its people, but because the operations function gives the ability to compete by providing the
ability to respond to customers and by developing the capabilities that will keep it ahead of
its competitors in the future” (p. 34). Mahadevan (2009) states that there are five distinct
basic performance objectives of operations management that applies to all organisations:

1.2.1. Quality

According to Slack et al. (2010) organisations need to satisfy their clients by providing them
products and services that are ‘fit for their purpose’. This means that the organisations need to
do things ‘the right way’ and avoid from making mistakes (Wild, 2003). This is because
consistency in quality as per Slack et al., is not only represented by continuous production of
quality goods and services as well as consistent satisfaction of external customers, but also by
developing easier life within the operation itself. Mahadevan conforms to Slack et al. and
Wild’s findings and states that quality not only reduces cost of production, products, and
services, but also increases dependability on the organisation itself. This means that the
consumer confidence over the product or service provided by the organisation increases and
they rely and depend upon them without caring about whether it will suit and fulfil their
needs or not.

3
Slack et al. further stated that quality is not same for all businesses even though the basic idea
behind it is the same. According to them it means different things in different operations (see
figure 1.3).

Figure 1.3: Quality means differently in distinct Operations


(Source: Slack et al., 2010, p. 41)

1.2.2. Speed

Mishra (2009) posits that speed refers to the time that it takes for organisations to respond to
consumer needs and demands. Slack et al. (2010) also conforms when they say that “speed
means the elapsed time between customers requesting products or services and receiving
them” (p. 42). The quicker the response time, the better the speed is, and the more the
customers are satisfied. This does not mean that speed only refers to the time people coming
at check out on a supermarket or a person buying a car from the showroom it also refers to
internal operations within an organisation and also within the operations themselves. It has
been concluded by Slack et al. that “fast response to external customers is greatly helped by
speedy decision-making and speedy movement of materials and information inside the
operation” (p. 42).

This is important as customers are more likely to buy products and services that reach them
on-time and on-demand and where they don’t have to wait for extra time for their demands to
be met. Speed, according to Mahadevan, reduces inventories as the products are moves faster
4
from their raw material shape to finished goods, and reduces risks by removing forecasting
mistakes. Same as Quality, as has been stated by Slack et al., speed also differs from
operations to operations. These differences can be seen from figure 1.4.

Figure 1.4: Speed means differently in distinct Operations


(Source: Slack et al., 2010, p. 42)

1.2.3. Dependability

Neely (2007) stated that “time has been described as both a source of competitive advantage
and the fundamental measure of operations performance […] the production or delivery of
goods either too early or too late is wasteful” (p. 71). This has been further supported by the
views of researchers such as Murthy (2005), De Toni et al. (2011), and Rowbotham et al.
(2012) when they state that it is meeting the promises made to customers regarding when
their products or services will be delivered.

Within the operation itself, as has been stated by Slack et al. customers will judge based on
how reliable and dependable any given process is in meeting deadlines, delivering materials,
and providing the relevant information. They stated that dependability saves not only time but
also money in the process as it reduces cost and hence provides stability to the operations.

5
1.2.4. Flexibility

Flexibility in operations means that the operation can change according to the demands of
consumers in one way or the other. These changes can be necessary in order to meet four
differ kind of requirements. These four different requirements, according to Slack et al
(2010), are to offer and introduce new product or service, to create a mix of products and
services, in the output level of products and services and their volume, and in order to change
the delivery time of them based on end-consumer’s requirements.

Different operations have different flexibility requirements (see figure 1.5) but the most
important of external benefit that can be derived from flexibility is to offer customised
products and services to consumers based on their individual demands (Wild, 2003).

Figure 1.5: Flexibility means differently in distinct Operations


(Source: Slack et al., 2010, p. 46)

Conforming to what has been stated by Wild, Slack et al. state that “high flexibility gives the
ability to produce a high variety of products and services” (p. 47). It is, however, to be kept
in mind that on one hand high variety will mean higher costs and on the other, it certainly
will not ensure that high volume of differentiated products will be required (De Toni et al.,
2011). This high cost forced organisations to come up with an approach called ‘mass
customization’ (Slack et al., 2010) where companies manage to produce their customised
products in high volumes even though the offer customisation on the level of individual’s

6
demands. Mahadevan (2009) concluded that flexibility offers speed, response time, and
dependability.

1.2.5. Cost

Cost, for the companies competing on the basis of price, will be a major objective in their
operations (Mishra, 2009). Slack et al. (2010) state that if the cost of producing the products
and services is lower for the companies then they can offer comparatively cheaper prices to
their consumers. They stated that even companies that are not forced to compete on price, or
are not interested in do so, will, at some point, be interested in reducing them for the benefit
of their loyal customers. Moreover, Murthy (2005) stated that the amount deducted from cost
of manufacturing or producing a product or service will ultimately add in the profits that can
be generated from selling them. Furthermore, it has been stated by Neely (2007) that lower
costs are always interesting and attractive for end-customers irrespective of their loyalty to
the brand. It has been stated by Slack et al (2010) that cost, just like the other four objectives,
can mean different thing in different operations (see figure 1.6).

Figure 1.6: Cost means differently in distinct Operations


(Source: Slack et al., 2010, p. 49)

It is not that organisations keep their prices low while compromising on speed, quality,
flexibility, and dependability but they do try to keep the as low as possible without
compromising on what quality, dependability, speed, and flexibility their consumers demand.

7
1.3. Performance Management

The sections above described, defined, and discussed the performance objectives and
distinguished between internal and external performance objectives and their benefits. One
thing that comes at the forefront and can be deduced is that all of the performance objectives
in one way or the other affect cost (see figure 1.7).

Figure 1.7: External effects of the five performance objectives


(Source: Slack et al., 2010, p. 52)

Organisations utilise many different approaches to analyse current performance levels and the
required levels of performance in order to gain competitive edge and advantage (Slack et al.,
2010). These approaches include benchmarking, defining short term, medium term, and long
term targets, and Performance Indicators that are continuously monitored based on the
environmental research. Furthermore, Mahadevan (2009) posits that balance scorecards are
used and profits along with the growth of the organisation is analysed. All organisations that
are interested in managing their performance levels also keep a keen eye on their major
competitors and ensure that they are ahead of their rivals and competitors. In order to do so,
the organisations need to keep their consumer base satisfied, loyal, and retain them for longer

8
period of time. De Toni et al. (2011) stated that this can only be done when customers believe
that they are getting their value for money in the shape of products and services offered by
any given organisation.

Task – 2: Importance of Managing Quality

2.1. History of Quality Movement

In current era and over the past two decades the two leading buzzwords in the business world
have been ‘quality’ and ‘quality management systems’ (Pfiefer, 2002) and numerous
consultants such as Six Sigma consulting and American society for Quality have built their
careers around them. The American Society for Quality defines quality in different ways.
According to them it can be based on perceptions of consumer on the design of a service or
product and the level to which it matches to the original specification, the ability of a service
or product to satisfied implied or stated requirements, or it can be achieved by meeting the
requirements that are established within any given organisation (Baged, 2008).

Many practitioners and academics have tried to develop a definition of quality that is
coherent but that fact stays that there is not any unequivocal definition of quality and this
proves that the matter that is extremely complicated. Thinkers, however, have come to one
conclusion that the quality is related to ‘excellence’ or more accurately ‘perceived
excellence’ (Campbell et al., 2002) and hence, those people who have contributed in the field
of quality management in such a way that their contribution has changed the operations
within organisations have been called Quality ‘gurus’ (Mohanty, 2008).

Though many people have contributed in the study and development of quality management
but an American W. Edwards Deming holds a special place in them. As early as in 1950s
Deming was enlisted by Japanese companies once they began to observe benefits of
emphasising on quality. Deming provided a list of 14 points to the Japanese companies that
gave them head start in quality movement (Campbell et al., 2002).

It was mentioned by Deming that 85% of the problems that occur within the quality of
products and services are due to the mistakes and faults of the management and if the
management of an organisation wants to remove these faults they have to take the lead so that
necessary systems are resources are made available for the quality products and services.

9
Bagar (2008) stated that Deming believed that in order to address the needs of quality
systems two different concepts are to be tackled one he called common (systematic) cause of
error and two, special cause of error. According to Bagar systematic causes include poor
design of products or service, unsuitable material used for products, and poor physical
condition while special causes include lack of training and skills or use of unsuitable
machines and other equipment.

Another person who gained importance through Japanese industrial revolution was Joseph M.
Juran. He established Juran Institute in 1979 with objectives and goals centred on providing
help to organisations in order to improve their product and service quality (Mohanty, 2008).
His definition of quality was that the product or service should have ‘fitness for use’ and it
should be reliable whenever the user requires it. There have been many gurus both from
Japan such as Kaoru Ishikawa, Genichi Taguchi, and Shingeo Shingo and from America such
as Philip Crosby and Top Peters, who developed the quality management concepts further
from what Deming and Juran produced.

The concept of quality entered US in 1980s and Ford was the first company to take initiative
by asking Deming’s help to transform into an organisation that is quality oriented (Bagar,
2008). The achievements of Ford after this provided base for the US Congress to establish
Malcolm Baldridge National Quality Award to make other companies interested in quality
management and since then there have been many approaches of quality management in this
quality movement that started in early 1950s. The concept of quality management is so
attractive and vast that many organisations such as ISO 9000 have dedicated themselves
solely to setting standards for quality (Campbell et al., 2002).

2.2. Model of Quality

2.2.1. Six Sigma

The word ‘sigma’ is used by engineers and mathematicians as a unit of measurement in


variations of quality in products. Motorola Inc of USA started using ‘Six Sigma’ as an in-
house developed and initiated model of initiatives that were utilised to reduce the production
process defects. This model proved to be so successful that later on it was adopted by Allied
Signal an Avionics Company in 1991 and later on in 1995 by General Electric (GE). Sig
Sigma became an industry of its own by the year 2000 with many different organisations
utilising the methodology for their product and service quality.

10
The Department for Trade and Industry in the United Kingdom defines Six Sigma as “a
data-driven method for achieving near perfect quality. Six Sigma analysis can focus on any
element of production or service, and has a strong emphasis on statistical analysis in design,
manufacturing and customer-oriented activities” (DTI, 2005). The methodology, by most
practitioners, is related to Motorola’s early DMAIC acronym which has further been
extended to DMAICT and it is:

 D – Define Opportunity
 M – Measure Performance
 A – Analyse Opportunity
 I – Improve Performance
 C – Control Performance
 T – Transfer Best Practices (Optional)

The team leaders of organisations that deal with Six Sigma work along with other team
members to analyse and analyse the critical process and their performance levels. These
detailed investigations involve developing flowcharts, analysis of organisational structures,
and the processes that are already in place within the organisation (Aruleswaran, 2010). The
Six Sigma does not, necessarily, define what methods and tools for these investigations to use
hence different performance measurement tools such as ‘process mapping’ and ‘balance
scorecard’ are utilised by different organisations. It should be kept in mind that Six Sigma is
not restricted to production and engineering only, it also encompasses the service related
activities (Truscott, 2012).

2.2.2. Service Quality Model

The model of service quality was developed by Zeithaml et al. (1990) on the basis of factors
that have an effect on the perception of the consumers regarding the poor quality offered by
the organisation. They stated that it is not possible for all organisations to meet the
expectations that their customers have with them. They might meet them some times and
other times they may fall short of them. It was stated by them that there are always going to
be problems and deficiencies in the quality of service that the organisation provides and the
quality of service required and perceived by customers.

11
Zeithaml et al. stated that these deficiencies are ‘Gaps’ that exist between perceived and
actual quality of the organisations (see figure 2.1) but they do not mean that customers will
necessarily leave the organisation if expected service quality is not delivered.

Figure 2.1: Service Quality Conceptual Model


(Source: Zeithaml et al, 1990, p. 46)

These Gaps are described by Zeithaml et al (1990) as:

 Gap 1 – Discrepancy between management and client perception about wants


 Gap 2 – Discrepancy between management and client perception about service standard
and design.
 Gap 3 – Discrepancy between management and client perception about delivery and
service quality
 Gap 4 – Discrepancy between what is being delivered to customer and what is being
communicated
 Gap 5 – Service Quality assessment from the client’s point of view.

O’Connel and Williams (2005) stated that this model supports companies in guaranteeing that
strategies are developed that can help gain Service Excellence.

12
2.2. Monitoring Organisational Performance

Monitoring performance is vital for organisations to understand where they stand and what
they need to do to reach where they want to be (O’Connell and Williams, 2005). It is a
process by which important aspects are monitored by the organisations along with its other
core processes, systems, and programs. The information is generated through the
manipulation of data gathered regarding processes and their working which helps
organisations in taking their future oriented decisions (Neely, 2007).

Academics have pointed out numerous reasons that become the base for why organisations
choose performance measurements. It provides organisations reliable data based on which
they can analyse their current standing (Mohanty, 2008). Furthermore, in current
marketplace, it is required for organisations to have transparency in their operations and
business practices (Lerner and Schoar, 2010). This is for the scrutiny of watchdog
organisations as well as civil society. There are many other circumstances on the basis of
which organisations may want to measure their performances such as:

 Distinguish between actual and perceived happenings.


 Baseline establishment such as measuring before making improvements
 Gather solid evidence in order to make informed decisions
 To show that improvements are made on the basis of changes
 To compare performance within different operations
 Monitor changed processes in order to confirm that long term improvements are sustained

Task – 3: Planning Strategic Quality Change

This section provides a case study and strategic plan for quality change in an organisation
‘Bugga Construction Ltd’ based on the discussions in section 1 and 2.

Bugga Construction Ltd is a construction company based in London and executes different
small scale construction projects both residential and commercial. Recently, the owner of the
company decided that it is time for the company to undertake larger projects especially
related to Large Retail chains such as Tesco and ASDA. Furthermore, Mr. Singh, the owner
of the company believes that the operations of company should be expanded beyond the
London area and also move to other larger cities such as Manchester and Birmingham.

13
This is all good however the current operational processes and operations function contains
many loopholes that are the reason for high costs, increased wastage. Moreover, there is
shortage of required machinery and trained staff members. It is believed by the owner that the
business operations function needs to be analysed and re-evaluated to improve quality and
efficiency of operations within and outside the organisational boundaries. This required GAP
analysis (see section 2.2.2) as has been mentioned by Zeithaml et al. (1990).

3.1. GAP Analysis

GAP analysis as have been mentioned by Zeithaml et al. (1990) allows managers to compare
expected performance with actual performance in order to identify the problems and potential
(see section 2.2.2).

The GAP analysis of Bugga Construction Ltd. shows that the company is under performing
in all internal and external operations. For this purpose, a GAP analysis was conducted for a
newly build 5-bedroom house (see figure 2.2). The said house also included Sitting room,
dining room, kitchen, upstairs and downstairs toilets, and a garage.

Resources Expected Actual


Bricks 20,000 16,000
Cement 5,000 kg 3,250 kg
Sand 19,000 kg 14,350 kg
Human Resource 14 people 21 people
Completion Time 4 months 5 months
Figure 2.2: GAP Analysis Report
As can be seen from figure 2.2, there is a significant gap between expected resource
utilisation and the actual resources that were used.

Based on the discussion in section 1 and 2 of this report, it can be seen that the resources such
as bricks, cement and sand were overestimated and hence the remaining raw material had to
be stored incurring extra cost while human resources were under-estimated which had to be
increased as the project went ahead and hence the Completion time increased from 4 months
to 5 months. This means that the speed factor discussed in section 1.2.2 and dependability
discussed in section 1.2.3 were compromised.

14
3.2. Degree of Change

In order to close the GAPS identified through the analysis above and in order to meet the
quality standards as per requirements of the organisation, an organisation wide change is
needed. This planned changed will be on incremental basis and will be continuum ranging
involving all process improvements and limited fundamental changes in operational
dimensions. These changes will occur in the decision making patterns, culture, and business
strategies.

3.3. Employee Participation

Change can never be successful until all the relevant employees and other stakeholders share
the same vision and goal. It is extremely important to involve all employees and
communicate the planned change to them. Furthermore, their inputs are going to be vital for
the success of any change as they are most suitable to provide input about their relevant field.
In addition to this, if employees are not involved then the ‘fear of unknown’ (Sharma, 2006)

3.4. Resource Requirements

For the purpose of proposed quality change following resources are required:

3.4.1. Technology

Bugga Construction limited need to take more advantage of currently available machinery as
well as the new and improved machines that are introduced in the market every day.
Furthermore, Computers, CAD programs, and Statistic analytical programs are to be used to
calculate and measure the raw materials. In instance of such change can be seen in the
switching of old, bulky, and petrol driven mixer that is expansive in long run with a smaller,
more compact, and electricity driven mixer which can be utilised on multiple sites because of
it being portable. These new mixers can fit in a minivan easily and hence can be used on
multiple sites instead of having heavy mixers for each site that cannot be moved from one
place to another. Moreover, changes such as switching alignment apparatus such as bubble
scales to electronic devices will also speed up the process and make them easier.

3.4.2. Transportation

The GAP analysis report (see figure 2.2) shows that over-estimated raw material was being
ordered and hence the cost of transportation was high. It was due to the fact that the raw

15
material was to be brought to the construction site and then the remaining unused material
was transported back to storage. Such costs can be reduced by utilising Just-In-Time (JIT)
approach where only the required material is ordered. This requires perfectly calculated raw
material quantity, efficient inventory control and ordering system, good relationship with
suppliers, and effective and efficient transportation system.

3.4.3. Employee Training and Development

With introduction of new technology, new machinery, and new equipment, the employees
will have to be trained properly so that they are capable of utilising them. In the process of
this training, the employee’s skill set will increase which will ultimately improve their
motivation levels resulting in high output from them.

3.4.4. Quality Systems

Quality systems are to be prepared and implemented in order to ensure that organisational
objectives related to quality are fulfilled. It has to be kept in mind that in construction
business the consumers requires quality of build, on time completion, and finished
construction within budget. Moreover, construction business requires highly satisfied clients
in order to gain word-of-mouth advertisement and marketing which is extremely important in
such businesses.

3.4.5. Quality Circle

It has to be ensured that quality circles are developed within Bugga Construction Ltd. These
are group of people who work in conjunction with each other in order to increase the quality
of operations and provide solutions for problems that are faced. As an example, experienced
workers in construction business can provide information about how much raw material will
be required in a given build or what type of paint can be used at which kind of environment.

Task – 4: Implementation and Evaluation of SQC

4.1. Quality Change Implementation

With Quality change planning done and strategic plan developed, Bugga construction ltd will
require to implement the change. This strategic change implementation can be evaluated in
order to confirm that the required change is effectively taking place. For this purpose

16
continuous monitoring and review processes and techniques can be developed based on the
stakeholders involved.

The best case would be to divide the change leading people into teams and providing them
with instructions and guidelines according the devised plan. It is required so that all teams
can move forward through the change process without requiring additional efforts on the part
of senior management. Team for evaluation of the strategic quality change can be developed
easily and they can monitor and review all operations and processes on a continuous basis for
successful implementation as they are empowered to do so. Furthermore, the company can
offer rewards, benefits, and incentives to best performing teams in order to generate higher
motivational levels in them.

In addition to this, continuous meetings, demonstration of commitment from senior


management, ensuring that the change is being communicated to all the stakeholders, and
performance measuring is done effectively. Furthermore, continuous feedback will allow the
organisation to keep track of current situations and realignment can be done as and when
required.

Checkpoints can be defined throughout the action plan to revisit and revise the strategic plan
if required. On these checkpoints detailed reviews about the change can be gathered, time
frames can be confirmed and re-established, feedback to all relevant stakeholders can be
given, and improvements can be made.

It is vital for Bugga Construction Ltd to keep records of all the reviews on each check point
and to ensure that continuous monitoring of the undergoing change is effectively done. In
addition to this, operations that have already gone through the change process successfully
are to be assessed with the past performance so that benefits can be observed and
communicated to all relevant stakeholders.

4.2. Quality Culture

In addition to the planning of quality change and prior to implementing it, it is vital for Bugga
Construction Ltd to develop a quality culture. This means that the mind-set of participants
should be shifted towards quality consciousness, especially the senior or top management.
This is required if the company wants to sustain the quality within the organisation. To do
this, the company needs to ensure that quality is at the forefront of all employees as well as

17
the suppliers and other stakeholders where it becomes their implicit belief, is part of
organisational norms and values.

References

Aruleswaran, A. (2010). Changing with Lean Six Sigma. Selangor: LSS Academy Sdn. Bhd.

Bagar, V. S. (2008). Total Quality Management. Pune: Technical Publications.

Campbell, D. and Stonehouse, G. and Houston, B. (2002). Business Strategy: An


Introduction. 2nd ed. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

De Toni, A. F. and Franco, R. D. and Li, J. and Li, Y. and Nassimbeni, G. and Sartor, M., and
Zhao, X. and Xu, X. (2011). International Operations Management: Lessons in Global
Business. Burlington: Gower Publishing Limited.

Lerner, J. and Schoar, A. (2010). International Differences in Entrepreneurship. London:


University of Chicago Press.

Mahadevan, B. (2009). Operations Management: Theory and Practice. 4th ed. New Delhi:
Dorling Kindersley Pvt. Ltd

Mishra, D. K. (2009). Operations Management: Critical Perspectives on Business. New


Delhi: Global India Publications Pvt Ltd.

Mohanty, R. P. (2008). Quality Management Practices. New Delhi: Anurag Jain Excel
Books.

Murthy, P. R. (2005). Production and Operations Management. Rev 2nd ed. New Delhi:
New Age International (P) Limited Publishers

Neely, A. (2007). Business Performance Measurement: Unifying Theory and Integrating


Practice. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

O’Connell, J.F. and Williams, G. (2005). Passengers’ perceptions of low cost airlines and full
service carriers: A case study involving Ryanair, Aer Lingus, Air Asia and Malaysia Airlines,
Journal of Air Transport Management., 11,4, pp.259-272.

Pfeifer, T. (2002). Quality Management: Strategies, Methods, Techniques. Ohio:


HanserGardner Publications, Inc.

Sharma, R. R. (2006). Change Management: Concepts and Applications. New Delhi: Tata
McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited.

Slack, N. and Chambers, S. and Johnston, R. (2010). Operations Management. 6th ed.
Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Truscott, W. (2012). Six Sigma: Continual Improvement for Businesses. Oxford: Butterworth-
Heinemann.

18
Wild, R. (2003). Operations Management. London: Thomson Learning

Zeithaml V, Berry L and Parasuraman A (1990). Delivering Quality Service: Balancing


Customer Perceptions and Expectations. The Free Press, New York USA.

19

S-ar putea să vă placă și