The Baldrige framework is used extensively as a foundation for internalsystems, but there has been a substantial decrease in the number ofmanufacturing organizations applying for the award. This research studyvalidates some of the reasons associated with that development.The Value of Using theBaldrige PerformanceExcellence Frameworkin ManufacturingOrganizationsPrabir Kumar Bandyopadhyay and Denis LeonardThe Baldrige Performance Excellenceprogram website introduces this wellaccepted framework, which is used bymany organizations as a foundation fortheir quality management systems (QMS)by stating, “Organizations everywhere arelooking for ways to effectively and efficiently meet their missions and achievetheir visions.”1 The Baldrige programwas initiated when U.S. leaders realized that American companies neededto focus on quality in order to competein an ever-expanding and demandingglobal market. In 1987, Congressenacted the sponsoring legislation, naming the award after the former Secretaryof Commerce Malcolm Baldrige, whohad advocated quality management as akey to U.S. prosperity and sustainability.Three primary objectives originally wereenvisioned—to identify and recognize10The JournalforQuality & ParticipationOctober 2016role-model businesses, establish criteriafor evaluating improvement efforts, anddisseminate and share best practices.Since then, the National Institute forStandards and Technology (NIST) hasoverseen the program, with ASQ and otherquality-related organizations assisting inthe process. Thus far, 1,639 organizationshave applied for the Baldrige Award, and102 have been recognized as winners.2 Theprogram’s criteria, which undergoes a rigorous continuous improvement processeach year, has been used as a benchmarkfor many other countries’ quality awardprograms, as well as those developed bystates, local communities, specific organizations’ internal programs, etc.The framework associated with theBaldrige program is based on a set ofcore values and concepts that are applicable to organizations of all types, sizes,
locations, etc. The overall performance systems ofseven categories are delineated in the detailed criteria. The online supplemental article, “LearningMore About the Baldrige Criteria,” provides a summary of the 2015–16 framework, which has versionsfor business/nonprofit, education, and healthcare.This article explores the decreased involvementof manufacturing organizations in the use of theBaldrige framework. The results of a survey conducted among key stakeholders familiar with thisindustry provides some insights regarding thisdecline, and some proposed approaches for changing this pattern are presented.General Effectiveness of the BaldrigeExcellence FrameworkBased on the widespread use of this framework,there is ample anecdotal evidence of its acknowledgment as a reliable basis for organizations’ internalsystems. A substantial number of research studiesare also available, however, and they support theefficacy of the Baldrige process. Here are just a fewof those documented results. Link and Scott studied 273 applicants from 1997to 2010, comparing the benefits they receivedto the cost of operating the program. The resultswere a ratio of 820 to 1, and that value did nottake into account the benefits associated with useof the framework across the entire U.S. economy.3 Historical studies have demonstrated a positive relationship between quality improvementand financial or market-share performance.For instance, Hendricks and Singhal reportedincreases in sales growth of 69 percent for thequality award winners compared to 32 percentfor the control group, total assets of 79 percentcompared to 37 percent, operating income of91 percent compared to 43 percent, and return onassets of 9 percent compared to 6 percent.4 Furthermore, Krueger and Wrolstad state that,“Winning the MBNQA is well-publicized evidenceof successful efforts taken to enhance the qualityof the management processes within the recipientfirm. Share price performance of MBNQA winnersrises after award announcement. In fact, in overhalf of the observed portfolios studied, significantraw or risk-adjusted market excess returns werepresent. Therefore, it appears as though investors positively reacted to the superior managerialskills and efforts of the MBNQA winners theBaldrige portfolio outperformed the S&P 500with risk-adjusted monthly returns of 0.71 versus0.56 for the S&P 500 Index.”5Baldrige Applications From Manufacturing FirmsOver time, the number of applications fromthe manufacturing sector has gone down substantially. In 1988, the initial year of the program,45 applications were received from manufacturingorganizations. In 2010 there were only three, andin 2012 two applications were submitted. In 2015,there were eight organizations in the healthcare category, two nonprofits, one small business, and oneeducational organization.Although systematic research to determine thecauses of this issue is not currently available, thefollowing anecdotal information was gathered as aprecursor to conducting the survey. Many of theseproposed causes have been discussed—or evendebated—in articles and on several online forums. The time and cost required to apply for the BaldrigeAward is more than the typical manufacturing company can afford to invest given other competingpriorities. The return on investment is insufficientfor the benefits the company attains. For example,one blogger noted, “A typical manufacturer alwaysgives the excuse, ‘I don’t have time for this .’”6 Manufacturing organizations perceive that theprocess is too difficult. “The problem, and I hateto say this, is that manufacturing is totally againstBaldrige because it is too hard. Manufacturinghas given up.”7 Some critics believe there are issues with theBaldrige framework and process, including the criteria that is too generic, insufficient transparency,the application document being too limiting forthe examiners to make a reasonable assessment,and a gap existing between the output of the sitevisit teams and the judging process.8 There are many other alternative options thata manufacturing company can use as thebasis for its quality system, such as ISO 9001.Furthermore, the prevalent use of Lean Six Sigmamethods reduces the need for a framework thatis as comprehensive and complex as Baldrige. The feedback provided to applicants does notprovide prescriptive enough suggestions to guideimprovement efforts.9 Winning organizations still have their weaknessesand challenges to address. Being recognized witha Baldrige Award does not guarantee that a company’s products/services are superior.10www.asq.org/pub/jqp11
It is worth noting one other potential cause ofthe decline in manufacturing applications. It isnot necessary to apply for the Baldrige Award tobenefit from the framework. Many organizationschoose to rely on self-assessment, state or localaward programs’ evaluations, or third-party reviews.Although these approaches do not provide the sametype of feedback that is associated with the formalBaldrige application process, it still has great valuein most cases. Given the amount of readily availableinformation on previous manufacturing applicants’experiences, manufacturing companies that havethe previously mentioned concerns may decidethat these alternatives will suit their objectives andresource constraints better.Study Design and Key FindingsIn September 2015, a survey was launched to gaininsights on the reasons for reduced Baldrige applications from the manufacturing sector. The target respondents involved key Baldrige stakeholders—businessowners, managers, examiners, and consultants. Thequestionnaire was made available through multipleonline communities including LinkedIn , and a totalof 94 responses were obtained.The survey contained nine Likert-based scalarquestions aligned with the anecdotal suppositionsregarding the declining application rate, and threeopen-ended questions that were intended to explorethe issues more deeply. The responses to these questions were categorized into themes to identify patterns.The actual survey instrument, response counts andgraphs of the proportions for the scalar questions,and summaries of the responses to the open-endedquestions are available in the supplemental article,“Manufacturing Sector Research Results RegardingDeclining Baldrige Application Rates.”Table 1 shows the percent of responses associatedwith each scalar rating for the first battery of questions. Table 2 provides a high-level analysis of thoseresults. It shows the sum of the “strongly disagree”and “disagree” ratings (bottom-two scalar ratings)Table 1: Results for Scalar DataScalar questionMany manufacturing organizations use the BaldrigeExcellence framework.Self-assessment is more than enough to understandand close the gap. Assessment by independentexaminers via the Baldrige process is of little value.The significant return on investment proven bynumerous studies isn’t enough for manufacturing toapply for the Baldrige Award.The award is not motivating enough formanufacturing organizations to apply.Winning the award does not change the marketperceptions of product/service quality enough towarrant submitting an application.The manufacturing sector thinks that applying forand achieving the Baldrige Award is too difficult, soits firms no longer apply.The Baldrige process results in bureaucracy andeats up management time and financial resourceswithout adding value.The development of alternative avenues to qualityimprovement and cost effectiveness, such as SixSigma and lean management, has diverted theattention from Baldrige even though Baldrigesupports such initiatives.Manufacturers are subjected continually to variousaudits such as ISO 9001/ISO 14000, SA 8000,OHSAS 18000, and ISO 27000 as a customerrequirement and thus suffer from assessment fatigue.12The JournalforQuality & ParticipationOctober 2016Stronglydisagree9.7%Percent of responsesNeither agreenor .9%47.3%27.5%1.1%7.6%18.5%58.7%14.1%
compared to the sum of the “strongly agree” and“agree” ratings (top-two scalar ratings). Because thesample size was fairly small and the stakeholdersrepresented a quite diverse mix of potential perspectives, statistical analyses of these results were notconducted; however, a qualitative test was used todetermine when a notable difference had emerged.Table 2 shows these results.Respondents reported a disproportionately highlevel of agreement with the following six scalarquestions of potential causes that had been postulated, and many of the categorical themes supportedthese findings. These results are listed in order of theratios of their top-two scalar ratings compared tothe bottom-two scalar ratings. Assessment fatigue had the most disparate difference with a ratio of 8.4, indicating that it is perceivedas the most notable contributor to the decline inapplications from manufacturing organizations. Two of the factors had fairly similar ratios thatwere quite large but were much lower than the previous influence. The first one involved the useof alternative quality improvement approaches,which had a ratio of 4.9.With a similar ratio of 4.5, respondents made itclear that the Baldrige Award does not stimulatethe interest of the manufacturing sector sufficiently.Concerns regarding the difficulty associated withapplying for the award was ranked the fourthhighest with a ratio of 3.2.The two final factors had a disparity ratio of atleast 2. The first indicated that the informationavailable documenting the return on investmentachieved by Baldrige Award winners isn’t compelling enough (ratio of 2.4).Furthermore, respondents perceive that winningthe award does not have a substantial enoughbenefit to warrant the effort required (ratio of 2.2).One of the scalar questions had a notablenegative ratio—one where the disagreement wasmuch higher than the agreement. In this case,a ratio of 7.6 confirmed that the stakeholdersTable 2: Comparisons for Scalar DataScalar questionMany manufacturing organizations use the BaldrigeExcellence framework.Self-assessment is more than enough to understandand close the gap. Assessment by independentexaminers via the Baldrige process is of little value.The significant return on investment proven bynumerous studies isn’t enough for manufacturing toapply for the Baldrige Award.The award is not motivating enough formanufacturing organizations to apply.Winning the award does not change the marketperceptions of product/service quality enough towarrant submitting an application.The manufacturing sector thinks that applying forand achieving the Baldrige Award is too difficult, soits firms no longer apply.The Baldrige process results in bureaucracy andeats up management time and financial resourceswithout adding value.The development of alternative avenues to qualityimprovement and cost effectiveness, such as SixSigma and lean management, has diverted theattention from Baldrige even though Baldrigesupports such initiatives.Manufacturers are subjected continually to variousaudits such as ISO 9001/ISO 14000, SA 8000,OHSAS 18000, and ISO 27000 as a customerrequirement and thus suffer from assessment fatigue.Total percentbottom-twoscalar ratings42%Total percent toptwo scalar ratings28%Notabledifference?82.7%10.9%Yes, disagreementis notable20.6%50%Yes, agreementis notable15.4%69.2%27.5%60.5%Yes, agreementis notableYes, agreementis notable18.5%58.7%Yes, agreementis notable52.8%30.8%Yes, agreementis notable15.4%74.8%8.7%72.8%Yes, agreementis notablewww.asq.org/pub/jqp13
who participated in the survey do not believeassessment is an adequate replacement forself- submitting an application and obtaining feedbackfrom qualified Baldrige examiners.Conclusions and RecommendationsAlthough there is an overwhelming amount ofevidence supporting the value of participating in theBaldrige process, including data related to the returnon investment, this survey’s results indicate that themessage is not penetrating the manufacturing sector. It appears that creating an awareness of whatthe criteria, framework, award, and the nationaland state programs can offer simply is not convincing this sector. Using improvement methodologiessuch as Lean Six Sigma fits well within the Baldrigeframework and actually contributes to even betterresults related to return on investments; so theseapproaches should not be considered replacementsbut rather as complementary methods.Based on the application rates associated withthe healthcare and education sectors, there seemsto be a connection between the availability of specifically focused versions of the Baldrige frameworkand engagement with the Baldrige process. Workingdirectly with the manufacturing sector to create aversion of the criteria specifically focused on manufacturing and its particular needs and issues mightbe expected to have a positive impact on the currentissue. Furthermore, identifying advocates, alignedstakeholders including peer groups, and regulatoryauthorities could stimulate interest among manufacturing organizations.These two strategies could be combined to provide a compelling case for manufacturers to investthe time and effort necessary because they wouldunderstand the ultimate value of the Baldrige process.4. Kevin B. Hendricks and Vinod R. Singhal, “Don’tCount TQM Out: Evidence Shows Implementation Paysoff in a Big Way,” Quality Progress, April 1999, pp. 35-42.5. Thomas M. Krueger and Mark A. Wrolstad, “Is ita Good Investment Strategy to Invest in MalcolmBaldrige Award Winners?” Journal of Finance Issues,Fall 2013, ge%20Award%20Winners.pdf.6. Du Fresne, “For Manufacturers, Baldrige Could be the‘Cure’ for Focusing on the Future (Part II),” Blogrige,The Official Baldrige Blog, r-focusing-on-the-future-part-ii/.7. Richard A. McCormack, “Bye-Bye Baldrige: U.S.Decides Quality is Not Worth 9 Million,” Manufacturing& Technology News, rige.html.8. Dean Hubbard and Paul Klute, “Perspectives:Salvaging Baldrige,” Quality Progress, October 2011.9. Taran March, “The Baldrige: Is it Worth it?” QualityDigest, tml.10. Jeremy Main, “Is the Baldrige Overblown?” r KumarBandyopadhyayPrabir Kumar Bandyopadhyay is a professor at the SymbiosisInstitute of Business Management. Bandyopadhyay is aSenior ASQ member, a Six Sigma Black Belt, and a qualifiedassessor of the CII-EXIM Bank Award (EFQM Model) of India.He can be contacted at firstname.lastname@example.org.More OnlineTo learn more about the Baldrige program and reviewadditional detailed results from the survey, go online towww.asq.org/pub/jqp/.Denis LeonardReferences1. NIST, “How Baldrige Works,” . NIST, “Baldrige FAQs: Baldrige AwardRecipients,” ge-award-recipients.3. Albert N. Link and John T. Scott, “Planning Report11-2 Economic Evaluation of the Baldrige PerformanceExcellence Program,” /director/planning/report11-2.pdf.14The JournalforQuality & ParticipationOctober 2016Denis Leonard is president of Business ExcellenceConsulting. He is an ASQ Fellow, a Feigenbaum medalist,and a member of the ASQ Quality Management Division’sOrganizational Excellence Technical Committee. Leonardis an ASQ Certified Manager of Quality/OrganizationalExcellence (CMQ/OE), Quality Auditor (CQA), and SixSigma Black Belt. For more information, reach out toLeonard at leonard email@example.com.
The Baldrige framework is used extensively as a foundation for internal systems, but there has been a substantial decrease in the number of manufacturing organizations applying for the award. This research study validates some of the reasons associated with that development. The Value of Using the Baldrige Performance Excellence Framework in Manufacturing Organizations Prabir Kumar .
May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)
Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .
On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.
̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions
Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have
Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được
Le genou de Lucy. Odile Jacob. 1999. Coppens Y. Pré-textes. L’homme préhistorique en morceaux. Eds Odile Jacob. 2011. Costentin J., Delaveau P. Café, thé, chocolat, les bons effets sur le cerveau et pour le corps. Editions Odile Jacob. 2010. Crawford M., Marsh D. The driving force : food in human evolution and the future.
Le genou de Lucy. Odile Jacob. 1999. Coppens Y. Pré-textes. L’homme préhistorique en morceaux. Eds Odile Jacob. 2011. Costentin J., Delaveau P. Café, thé, chocolat, les bons effets sur le cerveau et pour le corps. Editions Odile Jacob. 2010. 3 Crawford M., Marsh D. The driving force : food in human evolution and the future.