• 품질경영학회지
• /
• 제38권2호
• /
• pp.202-211
• /
• 2010

Many Asian countries operate the national quality award systems. Most of the evaluation criteria of the award systems are generally based on the MalCom Baldrige National Quality Award System of U.S.A. which started since 1987. But their operation systems for awards are different by countries. Comparing the differences among them can give a good benchmark for Korean Quality Award systems. There are poor empirical results that the Korean Quality Awards systems improve the performances of the organizations awarded. This paper proposes some suggestions for the effective operations of Korean quality award systems through the comparison among Asian countries' awarding systems.

• 품질경영학회지
• /
• 제35권3호
• /
• pp.55-65
• /
• 2007

The purpose of this study is to analyze the causal relationship among categories in the Korean National Quality Award(KNQA) model. The survey instrument consists of 79 questions from seven categories in the KNQA. Structural Equation Modeling(SEM) is used to analyze the empirical data and estimates the path coefficients among the KNQA categories. The result of this research indicates that Leadership drives systems that create Results through Foundation and Direction. Among eighteen hypotheses, sixteen hypotheses are statistically significant. Especially, this research indicates that Foundation and Direction are important mediating factors.

• 품질경영학회지
• /
• 제26권2호
• /
• pp.82-92
• /
• 1998

This paper reviews major aspects of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award and introduces some evidences that the Baldrige criteria can assess the quality of management to some extent. It is also discussed that how can we improve our national quality award program.

• 품질경영학회지
• /
• 제42권4호
• /
• pp.729-746
• /
• 2014

Purpose: This paper study the effect of the quality management on the performance among the manufacturing companies awarding the Korean National Quality Award(NQA). Methods: The data for 34 manufacturing companies are surveyed by the 7-point Likert scale and empirically tested. Results: Even among the companies awarding NQA for their excellent quality management level there are significant differences in their performance by their quality management levels. In particular, leadership and human resources categories have greater impacts on the performance. Conclusion: Even though the company awarded NQA(KQMA: Korean Quality Management Award) for its excellent quality management level, it is necessary to improve the quality management level continuously. This result supports the necessity of KQGA(Korean Quality Grand Award) which is awarded for the companies which improve quality management levels significantly after awarding KQMA.

• 품질경영학회지
• /
• 제34권2호
• /
• pp.22-32
• /
• 2006

The purpose of this research is to develop the methodology for measuring the effectiveness of the Korean National Quality Award. To test the validity of the model, confirmatory factor analysis is used. Conclusively, 79 questions in 15 sub-categories from 7 categories are developed valid in the empirical research. Seven categories are Leadership, Strategic Planning, Human-Resource Focus, Process Management, Customer & Market Focus, Information & Analysis and Results.

• 품질경영학회지
• /
• 제28권3호
• /
• pp.82-90
• /
• 2000

MBNQA(Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award) was established in 1987 in order to promote the spread of TQM in U.S. Likewise, JQA(Japanese Quality Award) was set up in 1995 in order to upgrade the level of TQM activities in Japan. MBNQA and JQA are quite the same in their basic concepts, values, and the process of the examination, but they differ in the contents of the criteria. The objective of this study is to Identify the differences between MBNQA and JQA in terms of strategy planning category, Therefore, in this paper, strategy planning category is analyzed, especially its theoretical validity is examined by literature review. The major differences are as follows: JQA emphasizes strongly the evaluation process than MBNQA by requiring the measuring of the level of strategic achievement. On the other hand, in MBNQA, strategic objectives must be estimated by decision analysts techniques, scenario tools, and other statistical methodologies.

• 품질경영학회지
• /
• 제28권4호
• /
• pp.140-150
• /
• 2000

MBNQA(Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award) was established in 1987 in order to promote the spread of TQM in U.S. Likewise, JQA(Japanese Quality Award) was set up in 1995 in order to upgrade the level of TQM activities in Japan. MBNQA and JQA are quite the same in their basic concept, values, and the process of the examination, but they differ in the contents of the criteria. The objective of this study is to identify the differences between MBNQA and JQA in terms of strategy planning category. Therefore, in this paper, strategy planning category is analyzed, especially its theoretical validity is examined by literature review. The major differences are as follows: JQA emphasizes strongly the evaluation process than MBNQA by requiring the measuring of the level of strategic achievement. On the other hand, in MBNQA, strategic objectives must be estimated by decision analysis techniques, scenario tools, and other statistical methodologies.

• 품질경영학회지
• /
• 제44권3호
• /
• pp.617-638
• /
• 2016

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to propose useful suggestions by analyzing difference of financial performance between "Excellent Quality Competitiveness Enterprise(EQCE)" awarding companies and all the manufacturing companies during the period 2003-2014 and by testing the moderating effects of performance year. Methods: This paper perform the longitudinal study during the period 2003-2014. The collected data through list of National Quality Award and financial report of CRETOP were analyzed using independent-sample t-test, paired-sample t-test, one way ANOVA and empirical analysis. Results: The results of this study are as follows; EQCE showed higher growth rate than all the companies until 2008, but profitability, stability, and activity are not significantly different between the both. Therefore EQCE have partial influences on growth rate among several financial performance measures until 2008. Since 2009 there are no differences. The effects of EQCE on financial performance are different by the year. Conclusion: EQCE award system was a meaningful promotion method to enhance good financial performance through encouraging quality management for the manufacturing companies until 2008, But since 2009 it is expected to lose its role as a promoting tool for quality management and performance excellence. Therefore new way of thinking for EQCE, as a national quality award system, is necessary; changing awarding system, award criteria, or etc.

• 한국IT서비스학회지
• /
• 제18권1호
• /
• pp.91-112
• /
• 2019

The IoT environment has led to explosive growth of existing enterprise data, and how to utilize such big data is becoming an important issue in the management field. In this paper, major factors affecting the decisions of companies to utilize big data have been studied. And also, the effect of big data utilization on the management quality is studied empirically. During this process, we have studied the difference according to the award of Korean national quality award. As a result of the study, we confirmed that the five factors such as cost from technology, organization and environment perspective, compatibility, company size, chief officer support, and competitor pressure are key factors influencing big data utilization. Also, it was confirmed that the use of big data for management activities has an important influence on the six management quality factors based on MBNQA, and that the management quality level of Korean national quality award companies is relatively high. This paper provides practical implications for companies' use of big data because it demonstrates for the first time that big data utilization has an impact on management quality improvement.

• 품질경영학회지
• /
• 제26권3호
• /
• pp.100-107
• /
• 1998

To evaluate the total quality activities is the most fundamental and critical process as one of the PDCA cycle. The quality award criteria such as Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award and Deming Award can be a, pp.ied to the guideline for evaluating quality activities. We can identify several important factors for TQM by referring quality award criteria, but they don't suggest how efficiently implement TQM. In this paper, two methodologies are a, pp.ied to evaluate the TQM activities comparatively. One of them is the traditional scoring system (TSS) by analytic hierarchy process (AHP). TSS is the system which evaluates the performance of TQM by the weighted sum of critical success factors. Several quality award system are typical examples of TSS. The other is the efficiency measuring system (EMS) by data envelop analysis (DEA). DEA outperformed other alternative methods to measure the efficiency and it can be a, pp.ied to evaluate the TQM activities. The evaluation system by DEA can be named as EMS. The objective of this paper is to suggest a model called TAE (Total quality management Activities Evaluation), for evaluating TQM activities. In this model TQM organizations are classified into four types by considering TSS and EMS. Those types are high weighted sum and high efficiency type, high weighted sum and low efficiency type, low weighted sum and high efficiency type, and low weighted sum and low efficiency type. Therefore TQM organizations must not only make efforts to get the higher scores in terms of TSS, but also take necessary steps to enhance their efficiencies.