Andrea Schiffauerova

A review of research on cost of quality models and best practices

This article presents a survey of published literature about various quality costing approaches and reports of their success in order to provide a better understanding of cost of quality (CoQ) methods. Even though the literature review shows an interest by the academic community, a CoQ approach is not utilized in most quality management programs. Nevertheless, evidence is presented which shows that companies that do adopt a CoQ concept are successful in reducing quality costs and improving quality for their customers. The survey shows that the method most commonly implemented is the classical prevention-appraisal-failure (P-A-F) model; however, other quality cost models are used with success as well. The selected CoQ model must suit the situation, the environment, the purpose and the needs of the company in order to have a chance to become a successful systematic tool in a quality management program.

Managing cost of quality: insight into industry practice

Purpose – The objective of this paper is to present results of the study of the quality costing practices at four large successful multinational companies.Design/methodology/approach – The method of benchmarking was used for the purpose of this study. Company representatives, who were invited for a benchmarking session, described the quality management programs running at their companies. Direct observation and archival records data collection were also used to extract more precise information for the following analysis and discussion.Findings – The findings of the study show that all four companies use systematic quality initiatives; however, a formal cost of quality (CoQ) methodology was only employed at one of them. This is in agreement with the literature findings arguing that a CoQ approach is not utilized in most quality management programs.Originality/value – This paper discusses and compares the quality programs of four companies and explains the benefits of the eventual adoption of a CoQ approach...

How to become an important player in scientific collaboration networks

Scientific collaboration is one of the important drivers of research progress that supports researchers in the generation of novel ideas. Collaboration networks and their impact on scientific activities thus already attracted some attention in the research community, but no work so far studied possible factors which can influence the network positions of the researchers at the individual level. The objective of this paper is to investigate various characteristics and roles of the researchers occupying important positions in the collaboration network. For this purpose, we focus on the collaboration network among Canadian researchers during the period of 1996 to 2010 and employ multiple regression models to estimate the impact on network structure variables. Results highlight the crucial role of past productivity of the researchers along with their available funding in determining and improving their position in the co-authorship network. It is shown that researchers who have great influence on their local community do not necessarily publish high quality works. We also find that highly productive researchers not only have more important connections but also play a critical role in connecting other researchers. Moreover, although mid-career scientists tend to collaborate more in knit groups and on average have higher influence on their local community, our results specifically highlight the important role of young researchers who occupy mediatory positions in the network which enable them to connect different communities and fuel information transmission through the network.

How to Receive More Funding for Your Research? Get Connected to the Right People!

Funding has been viewed in the literature as one of the main determinants of scientific activities. Also, at an individual level, securing funding is one of the most important factors for a researcher, enabling him/her to carry out research projects. However, not everyone is successful in obtaining the necessary funds. The main objective of this work is to measure the effect of several important factors such as past productivity, scientific collaboration or career age of researchers, on the amount of funding that is allocated to them. For this purpose, the paper estimates a temporal non-linear multiple regression model. According to the results, although past productivity of researchers positively affects the funding level, our findings highlight the significant role of networking and collaboration. It was observed that being a member of large scientific teams and getting connected to productive researchers who have also a good control over the collaboration network and the flow of information can increase the chances for securing more money. In fact, our results show that in the quest for the research money it is more important how researchers build their collaboration network than what publications they produce and whether they are cited.

The role of public funding in nanotechnology scientific production: Where Canada stands in comparison to the United States

This paper presents cross-country comparisons between Canada and the United States in terms of the impact of public grants and scientific collaborations on subsequent nanotechnology-related publications. In this study we present the varying involvement of academic researchers and government funding to capture the influence of funded research in order to help government agencies evaluate their efficiency in financing nanotechnology research. We analyze the measures of quantity and quality of research output using time-related econometric models and compare the results between nanotechnology scientists in Canada and the United States. The results reveal that both research grants and the position of researchers in co-publication networks have a positive influence on scientific output. Our findings demonstrate that research funding yields a significantly positive linear impact in Canada and a positive non-linear impact in the United States on the number of papers and in terms of the number of citations we observe a positive impact only in the US. Our research shows that the position of scientists in past scientific networks plays an important role in the quantity and quality of papers published by nanotechnology scientists.

Star scientists and their positions in the Canadian biotechnology network

This paper identifies the prominent inventors (star scientists) in the Canadian biotechnology co-inventorship network by taking into consideration either only patent quantity or both patent quantity and quality. The paper studies the positions of these stars in the network structure and results show that inventors with a higher number of patents assume more central positions in the network: they have more collaborators, enjoy better access to information and also have greater control over knowledge flows in the network. Nevertheless, their network positions do not have higher levels of local cliquishness, suggesting that a clustered local neighbourhood may not have any positive impact on a scientists innovative productivity. We also find that the majority of the stars play a knowledge gatekeeping role – nurturing clusters with knowledge originating outside. Finally, we examine and discuss the network dynamics and the role of these stars in the information transmission efficiency.

On the Relation between the Small World Structure and Scientific Activities

The modern science has become more complex and interdisciplinary in its nature which might encourage researchers to be more collaborative and get engaged in larger collaboration networks. Various aspects of collaboration networks have been examined so far to detect the most determinant factors in knowledge creation and scientific production. One of the network structures that recently attracted much theoretical attention is called small world. It has been suggested that small world can improve the information transmission among the network actors. In this paper, using the data on 12 periods of journal publications of Canadian researchers in natural sciences and engineering, the co-authorship networks of the researchers are created. Through measuring small world indicators, the small worldiness of the mentioned network and its relation with researchers’ productivity, quality of their publications, and scientific team size are assessed. Our results show that the examined co-authorship network strictly exhibits the small world properties. In addition, it is suggested that in a small world network researchers expand their team size through getting connected to other experts of the field. This team size expansion may result in higher productivity of the whole team as a result of getting access to new resources, benefitting from the internal referring, and exchanging ideas among the team members. Moreover, although small world network is positively correlated with the quality of the articles in terms of both citation count and journal impact factor, it is negatively related with the average productivity of researchers in terms of the number of their publications.

The Performance of Technical Information Transfer in New Product Development

The performance of new product development (NPD) is greatly affected by communication strategy and the information technology tools used to support the strategy. A number of users of NPD processes claim that an adequate communication strategy decreases their product cycle time and cost. However, the problem with evaluating the impact of information transfer is that no one has ever specifically measured how performant communication strategies are, or how effective information transfer tools are. For this purpose, a model was developed to evaluate communication strategies, and a set of communication measurement tools was identified to gauge the efficiency of information transfer. This study examines communication within NPD processes at three companies and measures how well information was transmitted, stored, and retrieved. The results indicate that a shorter, more efficient communication process reduces time and effort, and that a shift toward formal methods and passive information tools (computer-based systems) results in more effective and easier coordination as well as better integration.

Impact of Funding on Scientific Output and Collaboration: A Survey of Literature

This document critically reviews the papers that investigated the impact of funding on scientific output and on scientific collaboration. For the output, the focus is on the number of articles as a measure of the scientific productivity and the number of citations that a paper received as an indicator of the quality. Various methodological approaches have been adopted (e.g. bibliometrics (a set of methods to analyse the scientific literature quantitatively), statistical analysis) for this purpose. Reviewing the literature revealed that although the general assumption of the positive effect of funding on scientific development is completely (or partially) acknowledged in some studies, one can also find some contradictory results. In addition, we note that analysing the impact of funding on scientific output has attracted more attention of the researchers while investigating the impact of funding on collaboration has been only recently taken into consideration. The paper concludes by comparing the major results and methodologies of the reviewed studies while highlighting the research gaps.

A network perspective of academiaindustry nanotechnology collaboration: A comparison of Canada and the United States

Novelty of nanotechnology and its invaluable application in almost all fields makes innovation in this sector an interest for many countries, including Canada and the United States. The collaboration between academia and industry is considered to be particularly beneficial in nanotechnology, as it is an emerging field where the science is interdisciplinary and applications are far and wide. This paper compares the nanotechnology innovation diffusion and knowledge transfer in Canada and the United States. In addition, it investigates the interaction between universities and industry in these countries and analyzes their network characteristics to highlight the distinct roles that academic and industrial researchers play in the collaboration network. The collaboration patterns are studied through co-authorship and co-inventorship data using social network analysis. The results show that the American nanotechnology subnetwork involves more collaboration, and is more centralized than the Canadian one. Moreover, in the aforesaid countries it was found that both academic researchers collaborating strictly within academia and industrial researchers working solely among themselves occupy more clustered but less central network positions. Consequently, no matter how productive or innovative these researchers are, their role in knowledge transmission is quite limited, while the researchers who bridge the two sectors through collaborations of university-industry nature are critical to the knowledge transfer through the network.