Configuring quality management and marketing implementation and the performance implications for industrial marketers

Abstract

Acknowledgements: We thank three anonymous reviewers for their useful comments on earlier

What characterizes leading companies within business excellence models? An analysis of “EFQM Recognized for Excellence” recipients in Spain

“…García Bernal et al, 2004;Ryan and Moss, 2005). In contrast to previous findings (Ryan and Moss, 2005;Lai et al, 2012), the vast majority of organizations that are yet to achieve the high level of excellence do not exhibit varying patterns of adoption that would suggest that they would be adapting the model according to their preferences or limited resources. In fact, different approaches to the EFQM that would be in line with the patterns that have been observed in the QM literature, as for example those identified by Zhao et al (2004), are yet to be supported by assessments of Spanish organizations.…”

“…Moreover, Yeung et al (2003) described high performers as organizations that take together elements of different nature (technical and social), thus adopting a systemic approach. In a similar vein, Lai et al (2012) concluded that when QM practices are implemented in an integrated way and at a high level, better performance is achieved. Consequently, based on this stream of literature, leading organizations in the EFQM model would be expected to embrace all enablers criteria at a high level of implementation.…”

“…As a matter of fact, Ryan and Moss (2005) labelled "unfocussed" those QM adopters that are yet to achieve a high level of performance and that exhibit a more piecemeal QM adoption. In addition, Lai et al (2012) concluded that low performers exhibit an unbalanced implementation. Moreover, Dale and Lascelles (1997) and Yeung et al (2003) appeared to be in agreement with this interpretation, since they described that in lower levels of QM implementation the priority is given to firefighting, where organizations lack focus in their QM efforts and pick and choose their initiatives.…”

A systematic literature review on total quality management critical success factors and the identification of new avenues of research

“…On this point Grover et al (2004) stated that, although customer satisfaction may be considered the key purpose of the TQM philosophy, customers are the primary focus of marketing. Some researchers began studying this subject in the 1990s (Morgan and Piercy, 1992;O'Neal and LaFief, 1992;Fram, 1995;Lai and Weerakoon, 1998;Mohr-Jackson, 1998a, b;Morgan and Piercy, 1998;Morris et al, 1999), but since 2000 only a few papers have addressed the impact of TQM on marketing performance (Longbottom et al, 2000;Sittimalakorn and Hart, 2004;Yam et al, 2005;Idris and Zairi, 2006;Santos-Vijande and Álvarez-González, 2009;Fuentes-Fuentes et al, 2011;Lai et al, 2012;Sarfarazi and Behboodi, 2012). Recently, Sarfarazi and Behboodi (2012) found a direct link between TQM and customer satisfaction.…”

Effect of competitive tactics on performance: the case of the pharmaceutical industry

“…Some works defend that Marketing and Quality are interrelated, highlighting the impact of Marketing on performance (e.g., Lai, 2003;Lai & Cheng, 2005;Lai, Yeung, & Cheng, 2012). Du and Wan (2008) defend that an emphasis on Quality needs the mediation of Marketing in order to have a significant impact on performance, whereas Homburg, Krohmer and Workman (2004) conclude that this mediation is partial.…”