Global Excellence Frameworks and Human Capital

  • Flevy Lasrado
  • Vijay Pereira


According to the business excellence (BE)- and return on investment (ROI)-based Process Maturity–Global Insights ‘global survey 2014’ conducted by KPMG, over 60% of organisations invest in people-related practices to maintain employee motivation, learning, and career growth, while minimising attrition. In recent years, it has been recognised that the ways in which human resources (HR) are treated and developed affect their performance, and that, consequently, the general organisational performance is also affected. Given these considerations, many organisations have shown interest in global excellence frameworks such as the Baldrige or European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) models for quality. A study conducted by the New Zealand Centre for Organisational Excellence Research reported that there are currently about 61 excellence frameworks around the world (Ahmed 2015). These are the results of various national efforts of many countries to increase organisational competitiveness. However, in broader terms, many excellence frameworks are based on popular awards, such as the Deming Prize (DP), Baldrige Award, and EFQM Award. The latter two have provided foundations for many national-level excellence awards. These awards and their criteria are described in detail in this chapter. In addition, we illustrate how the excellence frameworks are linked to human capital and discuss the ‘people’ and ‘workforce’ criteria of the EFQM and Baldrige award models. Organisations seeking improvement in their HR management (HRM) also rely on known best practices, hoping they will benefit and improve their HRM policies and practices.


  1. Ahmed. (2015). New research shows 61 countries with national business excellence awards. Retrieved from
  2. Al-Tabbaa, O., Gadd, K., & Ankrah, S. (2013). Excellence models in the non-profit context: Strategies for continuous improvement. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 30(5), 590–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benston, G. J., & Hartgraves, A. L. (2002). Enron: What happened and what we can learn from it. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 21(2), 105–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bohoris, G. A. (1995). A comparative assessment of some major quality awards. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 12(9), 30–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bou-Llusar, J. C., Escrig-Tena, A. B., 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. Journal of Operations Management, 27(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dodangeh, J., Rosnah, M. Y., Ismail, N., Ismail, Y. M., Biekzadeh, M. R., & Jassbi, J. (2012). A review on major business excellence frameworks. Technics Technologies Education Management, 7(3), 1386–1393.Google Scholar
  7. EFQM. (2013). Fundamental concepts. Retrieved from
  8. EFQM. (2015). RADAR logic. Retrieved from
  9. Fisher, C., Dauterive, J., & Barfield, J. (2001). Economic impacts of quality awards: Does offering an award bring returns to the state? Total Quality Management, 12(7–8), 981–987.Google Scholar
  10. Flynn, B. B., & Saladin, B. (2001). Further evidence on the validity of the theoretical models underlying the Baldrige criteria. Journal of Operations Management, 19(6), 617–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hendricks, K. B., & Singhal, V. R. (1997). Does implementing an effective TQM program actually improve operating performance? Empirical evidence from firms that have won quality awards. Management Science, 43(9), 1258–1274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Husain, N., Mokhtar, A., Fazli, I., & Ridzuan, M. S. (2001). The Malaysian total performance excellence model: A conceptual framework. Total Quality Management, 12(7–8), 926–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ilieş, L., Sălăgean, H. C., Gal, A. R., & Bâlc, B. (2015). Quality awards: An image of business excellence. Annals of Faculty of Economics, 1(1), 1120–1129. [University of Oradea].Google Scholar
  14. Ishizaka, A., & Pereira, V. (2016). Portraying an employee performance management method based on multi-criteria decision analysis and visual techniques. International Journal of Manpower, 37(4), 628–659. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jacob, R., Madu, C. N., & Tang, C. (2004). An empirical assessment of the financial performance of Malcolm Baldrige award winners. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 21(8), 897–914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jagadeesh, R. (2014). Emphasis on human resource management in quality improvement–A case study of quality awards’ criteria. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management, 1(2), 1–12.Google Scholar
  17. Koys, D. J., & DeCotiis, T. A. (2015). Does a good workforce influence restaurant performance or does good restaurant performance influence the workforce? Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 14(4), 339–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kuei, C., & Lu, M. (2013). Integrating quality management principles into sustainability management. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 24(1–2), 62–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lazaros, A., Sofia, A., & George, I. (2017). Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA) dimensions in Greek tertiary education system. KnE Social Sciences, 1(2), 436–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lee, V.-H., & Ooi, K.-B. (2014). Applying the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award criteria: An approach to strengthen organisational memory and process innovation. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 26(11–12), 1373–1386.Google Scholar
  21. Malik, A., Pereira, V., & Tarba, S. (2017). The role of HRM practices in product development through contextual ambidexterity: The case of an offshore US MNC subsidiary in India. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 1–29.
  22. Martín-Castilla, J. I., & Rodríguez-Ruiz, Ó. (2008). EFQM model: Knowledge governance and competitive advantage. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 9(1), 133–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. NIST. (2015). The Baldrige Criteria 101. Retrieved from
  24. Oakland, J. S., & Oakland, S. (1998). The links between people management, customer satisfaction and business results. Total Quality Management, 9(4–5), 185–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Oakland, S., & Oakland, J. S. (2001). Current people management activities in world-class organizations. Total Quality Management, 12(6), 773–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Organ, D. W. (2006). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature, antecedents, and consequences. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  27. Samson, D., & Terziovski, M. (1999). The relationship between total quality management practices and operational performance. Journal of Operations Management, 17(4), 393–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schuler, R. S. (1992). Strategic human resources management: Linking the people with the strategic needs of the business. Organizational Dynamics, 21(1), 18–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sheffield Hallam University. (2003). EFQM excellence model higher education version. Sheffield: Sheffield Hallam University.Google Scholar
  30. Talwar, B. (2009). Comparative study of core values of excellence models vis-à-vis human values. Measuring Business Excellence, 13(4), 34–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Flevy Lasrado
    • 1
  • Vijay Pereira
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Wollongong in DubaiDubaiUnited Arab Emirates

Personalised recommendations