TQM Model of Elements-Deployment Table Developed from Quality ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 6 Time-Series Revisional Change of Criteria of Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award This chapter compares time-series of one Quality Award Criteria revisional change by using the method of development in Chapter Chapter 4 and 5, and confirms the effectiveness of the method of concerned. 6.1 Purpose of Research The purpose of this research is to identify for effectiveness of Principal Factor Analysis that is defined the feasibility of the TQM Element Deployment Table an anchor by comparing between time-series-revisional changes of MBNQA Ccriteria. Each Quality Awardhave periodically, or if necessary, been reviewed and revised for the criteria, after it enacted. For instance, the MBNQA has been executed every 2 years since 1987. Accordingly the passage of the revision is identified through the time-series change is compared by the factor model in each year. The Criteria book that can be obtained in Japan now for 7 critecia in 1988, 1989, 1997, 1999, 2001, 2003, that added the Criteria in 2001(former) used further in Chapter 4 and Chapter 5 for the comparison confirmation could study the time series change between them. 6.2 Research Method Though the research method will step on the procedure in Chapter 4 and Chapter 5, the 3rd level 181 elements of the TQM Elements Deployment Table (anchor) are replaced by 48 elements in 2nd level by using simple calculation method and in case of elements in MBNQA TQM Element Deployment Table in 2001, 86 elements in 4th level are replaced by 29 elements in 3rd level and TQM Quality Award Element Deployment Table becomes the matrix of 48×29. The Relationship Index of the matrix of 48×233 elements as total (in 1988 =42, 1989 =44, 1997 =30, 1999 =27, 2001 =29, 2003 =32, 2001 (former) =29) is calculated. The final matrix used for Principal Factor Analysis for the time series comparison is used 48×49 (the first item =7×7 of the each year). The steps are briefly explained. Step 1: To arrange and integrate TQM Elements (Bring it together in 48 second items) of TQM Elements Deployment Tables. Step 2: To prepare for matrix table (TQM Quality Award Element Deployment Table) between 3rd level elements of Criteria item in MBNQA TQM Element Deployment Table in each year and TQM Elements Deployment Table, and the Criteria item evaluation point are distributed. The matrix of 48×233 is prepared and it is called, "MBNQA Criteria Time-Series Comparison Matrix (Abbreviation: Time-Series Comparison Matrix)". Step 3: To weigh “Relation Degree (Relation Strength (0-3)” between TQM Element and 169
Criteria Element into each crossing cells in “Time-Series Comparison Matrix”. ➀ Strength decision for relationship will be done by the prodedure in Chapter 4 and be recommending to refer to Quality Award TQM Element Matrix in 2001. ➁ Relastion Degree (Strength of relation) of vertical column “TQM Element” is compared further by cell for degree of enumeration insertion from holizontal colomn of each year and the correspondence of the strength judgment of Relation Degee is checked. Step 4: To culculate for Relationsip Index of Time-Series Comparison Matrix by Relationship Index = Relation Degree × Evaluation Distribution Point Step 5: To prepare for The Time-Series Comparison Matrix with Relationship Index summed up by only 1st level elements (from48×233 to 48×49) by every year, as Simple Time-Series Comparison Matrix. Step 6: To calculat Principal Factor Analysis on Simple Time-Series Comparison Matrix Step 7: To analyze the Factor Structures Step 8: To evaluate and to conclude for analysis result The analysis of the factor structure by the above Simple Calculation Method should consider following respects. (1) It is not clear for any influence in factor analysis result by simple calculation method. (2) It refers to "Relation Degree" after the model of 2001 MBNQA use as standard. (3) As for the number of Structural Factors concern, it is forecast under 11 factors. That is, though 11 factors was decided in Chapter 5 provided Partner factor of EQA, Cross-Management factor and Revolutionary Innovation factor of Deming Prize but Factor Loading of these factors is small because MBNQA single model. However, it is possible that corporate governance and ethics action to the MBNQA peculiar, etc. appear. 6.3 Research Process and Result 6.3.1 Qualitative Time-Series Comparison Analysis The Criteria Eelement Deployment Tables (to 3rd level element) by Time-Series Revision Status of Criteria Item in each year weres prepared and was brought together in "MBNQA Criteria Item Time-Series Comparison Ttable (Table 6.1). Then qualitative time series comparison analysis was done by mutual comparisons of content of this comparison table. When it is described the outline as follows, (1) Leadersahip: It was not reviced till 2001, but "Organizational Governance" and "Ethical Behavior" were added in 2003 170
Page 1 and 2:
TQM Model of Elements-Deployment Ta
Page 3 and 4:
3.4 Foundation of Japan Quality Awa
Page 5 and 6:
8.4.2 Fundamental Concept 227 8.4.3
Page 7 and 8:
Figure 4.4 View Points of examinati
Page 9 and 10:
Table 2.13 Education Courses of gro
Page 11 and 12:
Table 8.5 Execution Rate of each Fu
Page 13 and 14:
global competitiveness and manageme
Page 15 and 16:
is called the Process Control Empha
Page 17 and 18:
started in the same year in 1987 to
Page 19 and 20:
Chapter 2 Deming Prize and its Infl
Page 21 and 22:
overseas companies and except 15 JQ
Page 23 and 24:
In 1960, manufacturing industries w
Page 25 and 26:
Purpose of promotion 1 Managem ent
Page 27 and 28:
method of promotion, and all compan
Page 29 and 30:
A new product and new technological
Page 31 and 32:
Table 2.5 Criteria for Tangible Eff
Page 33 and 34:
Table 2.6 Intangible Effects of TQM
Page 35 and 36:
It is actually feeling of all emplo
Page 37 and 38:
In addition, there is an company gr
Page 39 and 40:
Contributing to the quality improve
Page 41 and 42:
Management Theory and the IE introd
Page 43 and 44:
. 2.5.2 Social Influence of Groups-
Page 45 and 46:
As shown in Table 2.9, Toyota Group
Page 47 and 48:
Table 2.10 Main Quality Awards that
Page 49 and 50:
education outside the company, and
Page 51 and 52:
Table 2.13 Educational Course of gr
Page 53 and 54:
(G) Company Evaluation System (1) Q
Page 55 and 56:
③ Proceed to organize TQM promoti
Page 57 and 58:
Grancing over such status report, w
Page 59 and 60:
And, there is part delivery manufac
Page 61 and 62:
planning stage, and be opened the d
Page 63 and 64:
the Antitrust Law of the USA, but t
Page 65 and 66:
These social systems were planned a
Page 67 and 68:
concept dessemination and rearing Q
Page 69 and 70:
Reference 1. Noriaki Kano and Kozo
Page 71 and 72:
36. J.M. Juran: Up-coming century o
Page 73 and 74:
and individual visited to JUSE from
Page 75 and 76:
EQA propagated to all Europe and Af
Page 77 and 78:
Middle East, and Asian countries. M
Page 79 and 80:
management-led and customer-oriente
Page 81 and 82:
September 15, 1988, and the quality
Page 83 and 84:
Then, EU (European Union) and EFTA
Page 85 and 86:
No. of Companies 120 100 80 60 40 2
Page 87 and 88:
This observation was further mentin
Page 89 and 90:
further than we could have done on
Page 91 and 92:
for business result/performance eva
Page 93 and 94:
(C) Social influence of Malcolm Bal
Page 95 and 96:
Sum of Winners 70 60 50 40 30 20 10
Page 97 and 98:
④ Create a succinct decription of
Page 99 and 100:
Award was won at the international
Page 101 and 102:
The social influence of JQA is summ
Page 103 and 104:
the TQM activities is concentrated
Page 105 and 106:
Reference 1. Noriaki, Kano and Kozo
Page 107 and 108:
Chapter 4 Development of Comparison
Page 109 and 110:
Award TQM Element Deployment Table
Page 111 and 112:
(2) MBNQA is recognized their requi
Page 113 and 114:
Table, 4.1 Emphasis point % compari
Page 115 and 116:
method. This system are structured
Page 117 and 118:
The EQA was further expanded the co
Page 119 and 120:
(C) Objectives (1) Exept Deming Pri
Page 121 and 122:
1 Leadership (120) Leader ship (10%
Page 123 and 124:
Aim of TQM Framework of TQM (10) Co
Page 125 and 126:
(b) Item for Human Resource related
Page 127 and 128:
Table 4.4 Comparison of Expensecost
Page 129 and 130: (3) The assessment process is that
Page 131 and 132: Functional analysis of Deming Prize
Page 133 and 134: Step 2 to Step 3 Conversion of 4 th
Page 135 and 136: (Deming Prize Committee [7]), “Ma
Page 137 and 138: of MBNQA by Table 4.8 decrease elem
Page 139 and 140: Table 4.12 TQM Elements Deployment
Page 141 and 142: that this matrix is organized by 18
Page 143 and 144: Table 4.13 is named "TQM Elements D
Page 145 and 146: anking is done, rough of the featur
Page 147 and 148: There is neither "3 Customers and M
Page 149 and 150: Comparing the both, it is shown tha
Page 151 and 152: ut the coparison possibility can be
Page 153 and 154: 5. EFQM: The EFQM Excellence Model
Page 155 and 156: Attached Table: TQM Quality Award E
Page 157 and 158: y mutual comparison of each Quality
Page 159 and 160: In the Principal Component Analysis
Page 161 and 162: correlation with element related to
Page 163 and 164: Quality Award, as shown in Fig. 5.1
Page 165 and 166: About the absolute value of Factor
Page 167 and 168: Fundamental Feature (Speciality) To
Page 169 and 170: the Basis of quality management is
Page 171 and 172: Table 5.5 Summary of Factor Structu
Page 173 and 174: Table 5.6 Common factor and Factor
Page 175 and 176: technology utilization, To develop
Page 177 and 178: Reference 1. Kozo Koura, Tadashi Yo
Page 179: 1 Partner factor 6 Customer Market
Page 183 and 184: Table 6.1 MBNQA Criteria Item Ttime
Page 185 and 186: It is summarized that the criteria
Page 187 and 188: Table 6.3 Contribution Ratio of Eig
Page 189 and 190: |Factor Loading| ≧ 0.4 or less: L
Page 191 and 192: esults |Factor Loading| ≧ 0.4 or
Page 193 and 194: (f) criteria in 2003 About the abso
Page 195 and 196: 2001 (former) Table 6.4 Summary of
Page 197 and 198: 2001 former), “Meassurement, anal
Page 199 and 200: Fiscal Year 1988 1989 1997 1999 200
Page 201 and 202: management" for the future and "Qua
Page 203 and 204: Table 7.1 Progress of Management an
Page 205 and 206: Cost-up. The Construction of Consti
Page 207 and 208: improving steadily by promoting dep
Page 209 and 210: It was decided to achieve the above
Page 211 and 212: TQM (illustration)" as a common sta
Page 213 and 214: Because TQM is company-wide activit
Page 215 and 216: information management (IT; informa
Page 217 and 218: Fig. 7.3 The Evolution of Strategic
Page 219 and 220: 7.4 Management at which TQM aims Wh
Page 221 and 222: Management for Policy: Development
Page 223 and 224: When settling on by 2005 visions, A
Page 225 and 226: Chapter 8 Cross-Functional Manageme
Page 227 and 228: Cross-Functional Management being c
Page 229 and 230: The left side of Fig. 8.1 is Deming
Page 231 and 232:
cross-functionaly with TQM by board
Page 233 and 234:
For example, a Worjing Team of Qual
Page 235 and 236:
Fig.8.5 (a) Highly Developed Organi
Page 237 and 238:
8.3.2 Role and Duty of Cross-Functi
Page 239 and 240:
(1) All mutual agreement is obtaine
Page 241 and 242:
It is understood that the compositi
Page 243 and 244:
And, if it is company-wide problem,
Page 245 and 246:
department become secretariat thoug
Page 247 and 248:
(3) Do not think that Division Mana
Page 249 and 250:
is clarified though the business jo
Page 251 and 252:
After 1960's, most of the Deming Pr
Page 253 and 254:
Management (10.5) Auxiliary functio
Page 255 and 256:
Table 8.7 Problems before Introduct
Page 257 and 258:
Table 8.9 Main Problem before Intro
Page 259 and 260:
Table 8.10 Effects after Introducti
Page 261 and 262:
(4) It becomes easy for the Bottom
Page 263 and 264:
Reference 1. Kozo Koura: Developmen
Page 265 and 266:
September 1999 32. Michiteru Ono: J
Page 267 and 268:
Table 9.1 Summary of Comarison Anal
Page 269 and 270:
(a) Processes that benefit customer
Page 271 and 272:
That is, ISO proposed the process f
Page 273 and 274:
Table 9.2 Comparison of Leaderships
Page 275 and 276:
of joint collaboration work beween
Page 277 and 278:
It was President TQM Diagnosis in D
Page 279 and 280:
classes are sent with at the top th
Page 281 and 282:
His interest never waned. If the mo
Page 283 and 284:
preparation processing in a new age
Page 285 and 286:
William A. Golomski cooperated behi
Page 287 and 288:
And, this relates to the civilizati
Page 289 and 290:
Reference 1. Masao Nemoto, Kozo Kou
Page 291:
for receiving the material offer fr
show all

TQM Model of Elements-Deployment Table Developed from Quality ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?