Service Business

, Volume 7, Issue 3, pp 347–362 | Cite as

A comparative study of quality awards: evolving criteria and research

  • DonHee Lee
  • Dong Hyun LeeEmail author
Review article


The purpose of this study is to compare several prominent quality awards based on their common criteria. Six best-known quality awards were used and analyzed to identify common quality award criteria. Trends of research on Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA) and European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) Excellence Award were examined along with award recipients. The results of the study showed that the portion of manufacturing MBNQA winners has decreased steadily during recent years, while the portion of manufacturing firms in EFQM award winners remained steady for the time period studied. Also, health care and education related studies have increased steadily for both quality awards and now become most commonly studied quality award areas. Quality awards criteria appear to change continuously, reflecting the new demands of the changing market environment.


Quality award MBNQA EFQM 


  1. Bou-Liusar JC, Escrig-Tena AB, Roca-Puig V, Beltrán-Martín I (2009) An empirical assessment of the EFQM excellence model: evaluation as a TQM framework relative to the MBNQA model. J Oper Manag 27(1):1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chuan T, Soon L (2000) A detailed trends analysis of national quality awards world-wide. Total Qual Manag 11(8):1065–1080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Curkovic S, Melnyk S, Calantone R (2000) Validating the Malcolm Baldrige national quality award framework through structural equation modeling. Int J Prod Res 38(4):765–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. D’Agostino A, Serafini R, Ward M (2006) Sectorial explanations of employment in Europe: the role of services. Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) Discussion Paper No 2257:1–56Google Scholar
  5. European Foundation for Quality Management (2010) Available at: Accessed 15 July 2012
  6. Evans J, Lindsay W (2009) Managing for quality and performance excellence. South-Western Cengage Learning, MasonGoogle Scholar
  7. Fisher C, Dauterive J, Barfield J (2001) Economic impacts of quality awards: does offering an award bring returns to the state? Total Qual Manag 12(7):981–987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hsieh YJ, Huang LY, Wang CT (2012) A framework for the selection of Six Sigma projects in services: case studies of banking and health care services in Taiwan. Ser Bus: An Int J: Online first Feb. 3Google Scholar
  9. Lee S, Zuckweiler K, Trimi S (2006) Modernization of the Malcolm Baldrige national quality award. Int J Prod Res 44(23):5089–5106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mohammad M, Mann R (2010) National quality/business excellence awards in different countries. Available at: Accessed 15 July 2012
  11. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) (2011) 2011–2012 Criteria performance excellence. Baldrige performance excellence program. Gaithersburg. Available at: Accessed 15 July 2012
  12. Prybutok V, Cutshall R (2004) Malcolm Baldrige national quality award leadership model. Ind Manag Data Syst 14(7):558–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Tan K (2002) A comparative study of 16 national quality awards. TQM Mag 14(3):165–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. The Application Guide for the Deming Prize (2012) Available at: Accessed 15 July 2012
  15. Xiang J, He Z, Suh Y, Moon J, Liu Y (2010) An empirical investigation of the China quality award causal model. Asian J Qual 11(1):49–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Yang C (2009) Development of an integrated model of a business excellence system. Total Qual Manag Bus Excell 20(9):931–944CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.BK 21, Sogang Business SchoolSogang UniversitySeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of Management, 209 College of Business AdministrationUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnLincolnUSA

Personalised recommendations