Search results

Despite the widespread use of excellence models as a self-assessment tool in the past two decades, little is known about the underlying logic behind the way that promoting organizations give weight to their criteria, and whether these scores align with business reality. This paper aims to analyze whether these scores coincide with the vision of managers and the real situation of business today.

This paper uses three different methods and two kinds of data to review the evolution of scores on criteria in excellence models since their creation and empirically analyses and compares the results with the vision of the managers.

The results show that the estimated weight of criteria in the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) model (both directly perceived by managers and obtained with the statistical analysis) do not coincide with the value that the promoting organization has given to them, in its current version or in the previous versions.

This paper is focused exclusively on industrial companies so one discussion point that can serve as a basis for future research is to study whether there is any difference in the distribution of points between industrial organizations and services, or between private and public organizations.

The results show that, depending of the methodology used to evaluate the weight of each element of the excellence model, these weights could be different and are different from those proposed by EFQM. Therefore, if managers want to use the EFQM model of excellence for self-evaluation purposes, they should define their own weights for each element, in accordance with their own company characteristics. Leadership, strategy, people, partnership & resources and processes could have more or less importance in promoting the success of a business, according to the specific situation of each company.

This study has been made using three different methods and two kinds of data.

The European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) model is widely used as a management tool in companies. Consequently, it is of great importance to understand the relationships within it, and inform managers about appropriate ways to manage events in order to get the desired results in general, and for specific interest groups (stakeholders). The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This paper analyzes the internal relationships of the EFQM model using empirical data from a sample of 199 Spanish companies. Four managers in each company were interviewed, to eliminate single respondent bias. Structural equation modeling is used for the analysis.

The results obtained from the empirical analysis provide evidence of an underlying logic in the EFQM model that does not match the official model. New significant relationships between the enablers and results not considered in the official model have been found.

The study focusses on Spanish industrial companies with 50-500 workers and uses a cross-sectional design.

Managers should look at the EFQM model as a tool for finding their own way to excellence, but it is not a precise map, because the model may have some problems of definition. Managers should introduce its elements only after deep reflection on its benefit for their company.

Despite the previous research on this issue, there is still no clear consensus. Relationships that are not reflected in the theoretical model have been identified.

As with the ISO 9000 standard, some doubts arise from the scientific literature about the impact of the EFQM model in companies' success. This paper aims to present an analysis of the relationships in the 2003 version of the EFQM model using data from the actual self‐evaluations of 68 organizations. It also analyzes if there are possible differences in the EFQM implementation between public and private organizations.

The Partial Least Squares (PLS) method is used to test hypotheses.

Results show that the model does not behave in the way that the designers of the EFQM expected. Two of the results variables are not sufficiently correlated with the others to be part of the complete model. When the model is tested without these two variables, the connection between enablers fails, since policy and strategy, people, and partnership and resources do not have statistically significant effects on the process. There is a slightly higher achievement in the group of manufacturing/private companies compared with the group of public/educational institutions.

This paper is an exploratory study. A deeper analysis of the agency criteria might produce improved results. It would also be possible to examine sub‐criterion levels. Each enabler in the model is composed of different sub‐criteria and the relationships among them have not been explored in the literature. The question that needs to be addressed is whether the inclusion of enablers in the EFQM Excellence Model can be justified on empirical grounds.

Previous research has been conducted using secondary data. The study has been made using the real self‐evaluations of organizations, evaluations that have been validated by official staff of the EFQM organization. In addition, whereas much of the previous research analysed the 1999 version of the model, this paper focuses on the latest version of 2003.