Abstract
This chapter links quality perception to quality uncertainty. The extent of information asymmetry or symmetry has been used as the basis for this linkage. Quality uncertainty or perception is viewed from both endogenous and exogenous perspectives. Total Quality Management makes the endogenous side with TQM constructs as endogenous variables, whereas marketing science framework exhibits the exogenous side. Principles of economics of information are implemented to correlate marketing parameters with the TQM practices in industry so that quality is perceived by customers. Quality perception is an outcome of combined probability of information symmetry and TQM. Theories of probability and reliability engineering are used for mathematical modeling and analysis. Fault tree and success tree method is specifically applied to analyze quality uncertainty and quality perception at the market end. Quality uncertainty and perception behaviors are also related to product life cycle. Thus, a new direction has been given to the perceived quality that traversed thus far in different streams.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ahire S, Golhar D, Waller M (1996) Development and validation of TQM implementation constructs. Decis Sci 27(1):23–56
Black S, Porter L (1996) Identification of the critical factors of TQM. Decis Sci 27(1):1–21
Carter D, Baker B (1992) Concurrent engineering: the product developing environment for the 1990’s. Addison–Wesley, Reading, MA
Flynn B, Schoeder R, Sakibaba S (1994) A framework for quality management research and associated measurement instrument. J Oper Manage 11:339–366
Motwani J (2001) Critical factors and performance measures of TQM. TQM Mag 13(4):292–300
Powell TC (1995) Total quality management as competitive advantage: a review and empirical study. Strateg Manage Study 16:15–37
Saraph J, Benson P, Schroeder R (1989) An instrument for measuring the critical factors of quality management. Decis Sci 20:810–829
Tarı´ JJ (2005) Components of successful total quality management. TQM Mag 17(2):182–194
Zeitz G, Johannesson R, Ritchie JE Jr (1997) An employee survey measuring total quality management practices and culture. Group Organ Manage 22(4):414–444
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix A
Appendix A
4.1.1 Worksheets 1 and 2
4.1.1.1 Using Worksheet 1
Worksheet 1 refers to computation of TQMI which depends on the critical factors. Hence, the critical factors are presented in the first column. The status of any critical factor is determined by implementation of the related performance measures. Worksheet 1 when completed presents the TQM implementation status of any company. Entries in worksheet 1 are as follows:
-
1.
The critical factors evolved through the research of the last few decades are given in column 1. These critical factors collectively represent the TQM status.
-
2.
Performance measures for each critical factor are given in column 2.
-
3.
Each performance measure has significance for the TQM implementation in the company.
-
4.
Ponder carefully on each performance measure and fill the value in the third column that is most appropriate to the company. The value should be represented on 0–1 scale in a positive sense.
-
5.
Average the values of performance measures for each critical factor in the last column. This is a value of the critical factor under consideration.
-
6.
Average of the values of all critical factors is TQMI of the company. Write the TQMI at the bottom of the worksheet 1. The value will fall between 0 and 1. If the TQMI value is 0.65, it means that the TQM implementation of the company is around 65%.
4.1.1.2 Using Worksheet 2
Worksheet 2 refers to computation of information symmetry which also depends on the critical factors. Subset 1 of information asymmetry/symmetry factors represents the socio-economic conditions which are beyond the purview of any company (refer to Fig. 4.8 for subset 1 and 2). Marketing enablers or strategies to improve information symmetry are included in subset 2 of the factors. Subset 2, which makes the major portion of worksheet 2, is crucial in determining information symmetry and is common to developed and developing nations. For companies in developing nations, the values for the factors in subset 1 can be taken in the other issues. For companies in developed nations, the other relevant factors can be taken in other issues. Entries in worksheet 2 are as follows:
-
1.
The identified critical factors are given in column 1. These critical factors collectively represent information symmetry.
-
2.
Performance measures for each critical factor are given in column 2.
-
3.
Each performance measure has significance for improving information symmetry. The performance measures for these do not have universality and may vary from company to company. But a company has to recognize the suitable performance measures for each critical factor. For example, performance measures like complaints about the product, warranty period of the product, and claims in warranty period can be considered for the critical factor of warranty/guarantee.
-
4.
Ponder carefully on each performance measure and fill the value that is most appropriate to the company in the third column. The value should be represented on 0–1 scale.
-
5.
Average the values of performance measures for each critical factor in the last column. This is a value of the critical factor under consideration.
-
6.
Average of the values of all critical factors is information symmetry for the product of the company. Write the information symmetry at the bottom of the worksheet 2. The value will fall between 0 and 1.
After completing worksheet 1 and worksheet 2, compute quality uncertainty and quality perception.
4.1.2 Worksheet 1
Critical factor | Performance measures | Value | Average |
---|---|---|---|
Top management commitment | Allocating budgets resources | Â | Â |
Control through visibility | Â | ||
Monitoring progress | Â | ||
Planning for change | Â | ||
Quality measurement and benchmarking | Zero-defects conformance | Â | Â |
Use SPC for process control | Â | ||
Proportion of defects | Â | ||
Cost of quality | Â | ||
Percentage of products needing rework | Â | ||
Defective rate relative to competitors | Â | ||
Process management | Unit cost | Â | Â |
Production goals | Â | ||
Reduce material handling | Â | ||
Design for manufacturability | Â | ||
Reduce cycle time | Â | ||
Reduce setup time | Â | ||
Productivity = finished goods/no. of people or production hours | Â | ||
Productivity = total process time/total delivery time | Â | ||
Product design | Number of new products introduced | Â | Â |
Time taken from design to first sale | Â | ||
Fitness of use | Â | ||
Design quality | Â | ||
Employee training and empowerment | Training employees | Â | Â |
Training management | Â | ||
Cross-training employees | Â | ||
Training/retraining budget | Â | ||
Supplier quality management | Reduce inventory | Â | Â |
Supplier relations | Â | ||
Number of suppliers | Â | ||
Inventory turnover | Â | ||
Inventory accuracy | Â | ||
Implement Kanban | Â | ||
Material cost | Â | ||
Material availability | Â | ||
Customer involvement and satisfaction | Delivery dependability | Â | Â |
Operators involved/value-added labor | Â | ||
Customer service training budget | Â | ||
Prompt handling of complaints | Â | ||
Number or percent of complaints | Â | ||
Number or percent of orders that are delivered late | Â | ||
Broad distribution channels | Â | ||
Number of contacts with customers | Â | ||
Consumer surveys | Â | ||
Time to respond to questions/complaints | Â | ||
Responsive repairs | Â | ||
Percentage of repeat business | Â | ||
TQMI (total quality management index) = (∑Average)/7 |  |
4.1.3 Worksheet 2
Critical factor | Performance measures | Value | Average |
---|---|---|---|
Reputation | Â | Â | Â |
Advertising | Â | Â | Â |
Warranty/guarantee | Â | Â | Â |
Supply chain management | Â | Â | Â |
Word-of-mouth | Â | Â | Â |
Other issues | Â | Â | Â |
Information symmetry = (∑Average)/number of factors used |  |
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wankhade, L., Dabade, B. (2010). Quality Uncertainty and Quality Perception. In: Quality Uncertainty and Perception. Contributions to Management Science. Physica, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-2195-6_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-2195-6_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Physica, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-7908-2194-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-7908-2195-6
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)