Infrastructure and core quality practices in Indian manufacturing organizations

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to develop and validate a scale for infrastructure and core practices, including total quality management (TQM) and Six Sigma practices, in the Indian manufacturing organizations. Design/methodology/approach – In this study, a psychometric systematic scale development procedure has been adopted and executed, which includes three phases. Phase 1 includes item generation and selection through expert opinion. In Phase 2, scale refinement using item analysis, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and convergent and discriminant validity have been carried out. Finally, in Phase 3, scale validation through the replication of CFA and nomological validity assessment has been conducted. Also, a higher order measurement and structural model has been used to assess predictive validity of infrastructure and core practices. Findings – The findings of the empirical study resulted in a 45-item scale that measures Infrastructure practices (top management commitment, workforce management, supplier relationship, customer relationship management, Six Sigma role structure) and core practices (process management, product/service design, quality information and analysis, Six Sigma metric, Six Sigma structure), considering both TQM and Six Sigma practices. Also, the higher order predictive validity assessment model suggested that core practices have a higher impact on quality performance than infrastructure practices. Research limitations/implications – This study considered TQM and Six Sigma practices for defining infrastructure and core practices. However, future studies may include other quality tools in infrastructure and core quality practices such as Lean, Kaizen, and others in the measurement model to get more concrete results. Practical implications – This reliable and valid scale will help managers measure the level of QM in order to enhance business performance. Originality/value – This study symbolizes a first-time attempt for developing a validated tool to measure infrastructure and core practices in the Indian manufacturing organizations.

Digital Coupon Redemption: Conceptualization, Scale Development and Validation

“…They did not report any difficulty in understanding or answering the questions. No inconsistency, ambiguity, or cultural specifics were observed, and thus, the adequacy of the proposed items was confirmed (Patyal and Koilakuntla, 2015). Because of satisfactory evaluation in the pilot test phase, all the items were retained for final data collection.…”

Maturity of Processes in Smes: Validation of Scales When Implementing Project-Based Learning

“…Decision-making (planning), assignment of resources (organization), leadership (direction), and the measurement and control system. Ahmed et al (2017), Patyal et al (2015) Strategic planning Formulating an organizational philosophy, strategic analysis, goal setting, and plan layout.…”

“…Installations' maintenance, the internal physical environment, and transport methods. Patyal et al (2015)…”

“…Human, technological, and financial resources. Lin et al (2016), Patyal et al (2015) Other models and methodologies reviewed in the literature are either generic [(Tarí-Guilló et al, (2007); Rohvein et al, (2013); Eftekhari et al (2013)], designed for manufacturing companies [(Secretaría de Economía, 2002); Arellano-González et al (2013); Chin et al (2004)] or just evaluate a few variables of organizational processes [e.g. Top management support (Ahmed et al (2017), supply chain integration (Aryee et al (2008), industrial service offering (Partanen et al (2017), retail brand experience (Khan et al (2016), infrastructure and core practices (Patyal et al (2015), among others].…”

“…It has also been found in the reviewed literature about the organizational analysis that some studies use scales to gather data, which can be used as a reference when organizational processes are studied. In most cases they do not include, for the sake of brevity, the questionnaires used in the research [e.g., Vera et al, (2017); Ríos-Vázquez et al, (2015); Landázuri-Aguilera et al, (2013); Ahmed et al, (2017); Aryee, et al, (2008)], the ones that do include the items do not have a maturity of processes approach [(Patyal et al, (2015); Garg, et al, (2014); Punniyamoorthy et al, (2013) ;Sirén, (2012); Tiku et al, (2010); Ojha et al, (2009); Badri et al, (2006); and Patti et. al, (2001)], and only a few of them have a systems approach [Patyal et al, (2015); Arellano-González et al, (2013) and Badri et al, (2006)] but do not report on the validity or reliability of the proposed scales.…”