Linking firm performance to the malcolm baldrige national quality award implementation effort using multiattribute utility theory

Managerial Finance

Volumn 31, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 19-34

  Davis, Robert A ^a   Stading, Gary L ^b  

^a TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON DOWNTOWN   (United States)

Author keywords

Multiattribute utility theory; Quality; ROI

Indexed keywords

EID: 85016184209     PISSN: 03074358     EISSN: 17587743     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/03074350510769541     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Adams, G., G. McQueen, and K. Seawright (1999) Revisttmg the stock price impact of quality awards. Omega, 27(6), pp. 595-604.
2. Babicz, G. (2002) Assessing the Baldrige Award. Quality, 41(11), pp. 36-39.
3. Black, K. (1994) Business Statistics: Contemporary Decision Making. West Publishing Co., St. Paul, MN.
4. Bollen, K. A. (1989) Structural equations with latent variables. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
5. Dantels, S.E. (2002) Baldrige study says qualtty more than pays for itself. Quality Progress, 35(4), pp. 36.
6. Helton, R.B. (1995) The balkie play. Quality Progress, 28(2), pp. 43-45.
7. Hendricks, K.B. and V.R. Singhal (1996) Quality awards and the market value of the firm: an empirical investigation. Management Science, 42(3), pp. 415-436.
8. Hendricks, K.B. and V.R. Singhal (1997) Does implementing an effective TQM program actually improve operating performance? Empirical evidence from firms that have won quality awards. Management Science, 43(9) pp. 1258-1274.
9. Jones, S and R. Sharma (2001) The impact of free cash flow, financial leverage and ac-counttng regutation on earntngs management in Austratia’s ‘old’ and ‘new’ economies. Managerial Finance, 27(12), pp. 18-39.
10. Kosko, J. (1999) Baldrige index outperforms S&P 500for fifth year. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD. http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/n99-02.htm.
11. Link, A.N. and Scott, J.T. (2001) Economic evaluation of the Baldrige National Qualtty Program. Planning Report 0103, National Institute of Standards and Technology, available at http://www.nist.gov/director/prog-ofc/report01-3.pdf.
12. Moskowitz, H., J. Tang, and P. Lam (2000) Distribution of aggregate utility using stochastic elements of additive multiattribute utility models. Decision Sciences, 31(2), pp. 327-360.
13. NIST, 2002. S&P Stock Study, National Institute of Standards and Technology, available at http://www.quality.nist.gov/Stock_Studies.htm.
14. Powell, T.C. (1995) Total quality management as competitive advantage: A review and empirical study. Strategic Management Journal, 16(1),pp. 15-37.
15. Tai, L.S. and Z.H. Przasnyski (1999) Baldrige Award winners beat the S&P 500. Quality Progress, 32(4), pp. 45-49.
16. Taytor, C. (1997) Baldrige winners learn that qualtty really does pay. Managing Service Quality, 7(2), pp. 65-68.
17. Vokurka, R. J. and R. R. Lummus (2003) Better supply chains with Baldrige. Quality Progress, 36 (4), pp. 51-57.
18. Wilson, D. D. and D. A. Collier (2000) An empirical investigation of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Causal Model. Decision Sciences, 31(2), pp. 361-390.