Akiko Ueno

European quality management practices

The patterns of adoption of quality management practices and techniques vary across national boundaries. This article presents the findings of a questionnaire survey into the quality management procedures and tools adopted in three European countries, the UK, Portugal and Finland. A total of 450 responses are analysed. The main differences between the three countries are outlined with regard to factors motivating the implementation of quality systems, quality tools and techniques used, outcomes from quality management and problems encountered in providing quality training. The results are then analysed under the perspective of the probable impact of national culture. The models of national culture developed by Hofstede, Trompenaars and Earley and Erez were used for this purpose. The main conclusion is that these models can help to explain, to a great extent, much of the variation observed and constitute a basis for understanding why particular quality management approaches are adopted.

What are the fundamental features supporting service quality

Purpose – There are many features that have been regarded as having a critical role in supporting service quality. The purpose of this article is to identify those features that are fundamental in supporting service quality.Design/methodology/approach – A literature review was conducted covering total quality management (TQM), internal marketing, and the service quality literature, especially the study of service quality gaps. All of these are concerned with the search for service excellence.Findings – From a comparative study of these three areas of the literature, it was found that there are seven common features: recruitment and selection, training, teamwork, empowerment, performance appraisals and reward, communication, and culture of the organisation. Each of them is argued to be critical for the management of service quality.Practical limitations/implications – Although there are other factors that can influence service quality, the identification of fundamental features provides managers and academ...

Quality training: findings from a European survey

Quality management is an essential part of an organisation’s competitive strategy. The training that underpins quality management determines the likely effectiveness of the quality initiatives undertaken. This article details the findings of a questionnaire survey into the training provided to support quality management. A total of 450 responses are analysed. Findings from the UK, Portugal and Finland are compared to identify differences in national practice. Training provision is definitely focused at quality staff, but even with this group training in many of the traditional quality tools is denied to one third. The area in which training is given consistently concerns awareness, systems and standards. This confirms that much of the emphasis within the sample base is on working to a quality system rather than necessarily embracing the message of quality. Training methods tend to be traditional, with little impact evident of the hi‐tech revolution. Nevertheless, there is a spread of approaches considered effective with no single approach dominating the field. While external short courses rank top in all areas, the incidence is never in excess of one‐third.

Which management practices are contributory to service quality

Purpose – Previously, a questionnaire survey was conducted and it was found that some management practices were more influential to service quality than others. The purpose of this paper is to identify in more detail the reasons behind the survey findings.Design/methodology/approach – Eighteen in‐depth interviews into a range of management practices which support service quality were conducted.Findings – It was found that there were difficulties in implementing some of the management practices due to the type of staff employed and to the nature of tasks undertaken.Research limitations/implications – As the purpose of this research is to facilitate interpretation of the quantitative data, the investigation did not go in detail beyond mass and technological services. Hence, individual organisational characteristics, individual circumstances, or details of the service offered to customers are not considered beyond the category of either mass or technological services.Originality/value – The paper identifies ...

Is empowerment really a contributory factor to service quality

This article investigates how empowerment of front-line staff affects service quality in mass and technological services. A questionnaire survey and in-depth interviews were conducted. Analysis of the questionnaire data revealed that although there was a moderate association between empowerment and service quality in mass services, the relationship was not statistically significant in technological services. The interview data explain these results and highlight important differences between mass and technological services, both in the type of staff and in the nature of tasks undertaken. Moreover, it was apparent that there were difficulties in implementing empowerment in mass services.

Which HRM practices contribute to service culture

It is known that Human Resources Management (HRM) can help to develop service culture, which will in turn improve service quality. The purpose of this article is to determine the relative importance of six HRM practices in terms of their impact on culture. A questionnaire survey of medium and large-sized UK service businesses was conducted. The results reveal that there is a strong association between culture and HRM practices, and that some management practices are more strongly associated with culture than others. Further research should explore the reasons why some HRM practices are more contributory to culture than others. Service businesses in pursuit of service quality should make use of these HRM practices for developing service culture in their organisations. This research has confirmed a strong association between culture and HRM practices, and also clarified the relative importance of HRM practices in terms of their impact on culture in order to improve service quality.

Which management practices are contributory to service quality?: Part 2: Findings from in‐depth interviews

Purpose – Previously, a questionnaire survey was conducted and it was found that some management practices were more influential to service quality than others. The purpose of this paper is to identify in more detail the reasons behind the survey findings. Design/methodology/approach – Eighteen in‐depth interviews into a range of management practices which support service quality were conducted. Findings – It was found that there were difficulties in implementing some of the management practices due to the type of staff employed and to the nature of tasks undertaken. Research limitations/implications – As the purpose of this research is to facilitate interpretation of the quantitative data, the investigation did not go in detail beyond mass and technological services. Hence, individual organisational characteristics, individual circumstances, or details of the service offered to customers are not considered beyond the category of either mass or technological services. Originality/value – The paper identifies that the actual contribution from different management practices to service quality varied, and explains the reasons behind the diverse contributions in each type of service business.

Are Performance Appraisals and Reward Really a Contributory Factor to Service Quality

This research has identified that the actual contribution from performance appraisals and reward to service quality varied, and has explained the reasons behind the diverse contributions in each type of service business. In technological services, partly due to the hybrid nature of the business, performance appraisals and reward did not seem to focus primarily on service quality. Hence, these techniques were not one of the absolute necessities in improving service quality. In mass services, the use of these techniques was identified as being very problematic due to difficulties in measurement of services, and in setting criteria for service performance of frontline staff, especially in the qualitative aspects.