Characteristics, benefits and shortcomings of four major quality awards

International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 10-44

  Ghobadian, Abby ^a   Seng Woo, Hong ^a  

^a MIDDLESEX UNIVERSITY BUSINESS SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0002590699     PISSN: 0265671X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/02656719610109999     Document Type: Review

References (27)

1. Treveor, M., “Quality control - learning from the Japanese”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 19 No. 5, October 1986, pp. 46-53.
2. Camp, R.C., “Benchmarking: the search for industry best practice that leads to superior performance - Part II”, Quality Progress, Vol. 22 No. 2, February 1989.
3. Geber, B., “Benchmarking yourself against the best”, Training, November 1990.
4. Thomas, A.F., “Logistics benchmarking: search for the best”, Distribution, Vol. 91 No. 3, March 1992.
5. Whiting, R., “Lessons from the best in class”, Electronic Business, Vol. 17 No. 19, 1991.
6. Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), “Best practice benchmarking”, DTI Publications, London, 1992.
7. Ghobadian, A. and Woo, H., Comparing the Premier Quality Awards of Four Continents, Occasional Paper No. 13, Middlesex University Business School, London, 1994.
8. Union of Japanese Scientist and Engineers (IJSE), The Deming Prize Guide for Overseas Companies, JUSE, Tokyo, 1992.
9. European Foundation for Quality Management, Total Quality Management, the European Model for Self-appraisal, 1992 Guidelines for Identifying and Addressing Total Quality Issues, EFQM, Eindhoven.
10. National Institute of Standard and Technology (NIST), 1993 Award Criteria for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, US Department of Commerce, Gaithersburg, MD, 1993.
11. Ghobadian, A. and Speller, S., “Gurus of quality: a framework for comparison”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 5 No. 3, June 1994.
12. Garvin, D.A., “How the Baldrige Award really works”, Harvard Business Review, November-December 1991, pp. 80-93.
13. “Debate: does the Baldrige Award really work?”, Harvard Business Review, January-February 1992, pp. 126-47.
14. Omdahl, T., “Inside the Baldrige Award guidelines: category 2: information and analysis”, Quality Progress, July 1992, pp 41-6.
15. The Australian Quality Award Limited, 1993 Award Criteria for the Australian Quality Award, The Australian Quality Award Limited, St Lechards, 1993.
16. National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST), 1993 Handbook for the Board of Examiners, MBNQA, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD, 1993.
17. Cole, R.E., “Comparing the Baldrige and the Deming”, Journal for Quality and Participation, July/August 1991, pp. 94-104.
18. Sunday, J.L., and Liberty, L., “Benchmarking the Baldrige Award”, Quality Progress, September 1992, pp. 75-7.
19. Ghobadian, A., Woo, M. and Liu, J., “Benefit impact and shortcomings of the four major quality awards”, in Case, K. and Newman, S. (Eds), Advances in Manufacturing Technology VIII, Taylor & Francis, London, 1994.
20. Crainer, S., “Are awards a real prize?”, The Times, 24 February 1994.
21. Rickard, N.E., “Debate”, Harvard Business Review, January-February 1992, pp. 146-7.
22. Stratton, B., “Making the Malcolm Baldrige Award better”, Quality Progress, March 1990, p. 30.
23. Conti, T., “Company quality assessments”, Total Quality Magazine, June 1991.
24. The Deming Prize 40 Years Anniversary Celebration Booklet, JUSE, Tokyo, 1990.
25. Caulkin, S., “The road to peerless Wigan”, Management Today, March 1994, pp. 28-32.
26. Cooper, G.E., “Debate”, Harvard Business Review, January-February 1992, pp. 138-9.
27. Carey, J., Therrien, L. and Nett, R., “Managing for quality - the prize and passion”, Business Week, 25 October 1991, pp. 58-61.