Impact of quality management systems on firm performance

Abstract

Purpose Within the operations management literature, quality management (QM) has been one of the most popular research areas over the last few decades. The impact of QM systems on firm performance has been the subject of constant interest and challenge among researchers. Last such review was done in 2002 based on QM-related articles published between 1994 and 1999 and these were primarily on Total Quality Management (TQM). In the last 18 years, a large number of empirical studies have been attempted to investigate QM system-performance relationships in different contexts, covering not only TQM but also other QM systems such as ISO 9001, Total Productive Maintenance (TPM), Lean Manufacturing, Theory of Constraints (TOC), and Six Sigma Continuous Improvement projects. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach Based on an extensive review of 263 papers published in 17 reputed journals during the period 2000 to 2017, this paper shows the reflections of QM systems with respect to study of different QM systems, type of research designs being used, performance categories and metrics being used, and application of tools/techniques. Findings The literature review has revealed several gaps in research in the area of QM and calls for research on: empirical longitudinal case studies; implementation of multiple QM systems; identification of leading indicators of firm’s performance; standardization of performance measures; safety, environment and health-related performance measures; the differences in the QM systems on firm’s performance for manufacturing vs service organizations; application of QM systems in developing countries including Asian countries; and impact of ISO 9001 QM system on firm’s performance. Originality/value The literature reviews in the past had considered only the TQM-related articles published in reputed journals and did not cover other QM systems such as TPM, TOC, Toyota Production System, Six Sigma, ISO 9001 QMS, etc., which have also been widely used in many organizations, more so in the last 15 years.

Four decades of research on quality: summarising, Trendspotting and looking ahead

“…In a review of 103 academic papers on TQM, Aquilani, Silvestri, Ruggieri, and Gatti (2017) give a more nuanced account of the relationship between TQM and firm performance, concluding that research within this domain is still at an early stage. Similarly, in their review of 263 QM-related papers, Kumar, Maiti, and Gunasekaran (2018) identify a need for a more detailed and solid understanding of QM's performance effects by using refined research study designs. In an overview of the main criticism concerning QM during the past 40 years, Barouch and Kleinhans (2015) contend that QM seem to have gained an equal amount of approvals as disapprovals.…”

Effects of Service Quality Policies in the Tourism Sector Performance: An Empirical Analysis of Spanish Hotels and Restaurants

“…In this sense, QMPs activate three Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for the hotel sector including two internal and one external. First, internally, they improve human resources [25][26][27] and, second, they make internal processes more efficient [8,12,29,31,32]. Third, externally, they increase customer satisfaction [11,26,37] and generate a competitive advantage in comparison with the competition.…”

“…The positive effects of quality on a firm have been widely studied, as can be easily confirmed by looking at the literature from the last 20 years [11][12][13][14][15]. The majority of authors agree that quality can activate various levers, both internal and external, that improve company competitiveness [16].…”

“…The majority of previous empirical literature shows that QMPs benefit internal company processes [12,29,30], efficiency [8,31], the process of decision-making, and error reduction [32].…”

Estruturação de um Sistema de Medição de Desempenho em centros cirúrgicos para apoiar iniciativas de >i<Lean Healthcare>/i<

“…SegundoKumar, Maiti e Gunasekaran (2018), dentro de uma categoria de medição de desempenho também não existe uniformidade quanto à classificação de indicadores para resultados e seus processos. Entretanto, uma divisão presente na literatura está associada a diferença entre indicadores leading e lagging: os primeiros, relacionados aos processos, consideram categorias como qualidade, clientes, recursos humanos e indicadores operacionais, enquanto os últimos referem-se a indicadores de resultados, como as categorias de indicadores financeiros e direcionados ao mercado (GHALAYINI; NOBLE, 1996; KUMAR; MAITI;GUNASEKARAN, 2018).No que tange o desenvolvimento dos indicadores, Neely et al (1997) apresentaram diversas recomendações acerca do tema. Conforme os autores, os indicadores devem ser derivados da estratégia, simples para se entender, controláveis e relevantes, prover feedback preciso e pontual, e serem passíveis de alinhamento com metas e melhorias.…”