Search results

The purpose of this paper is to propose a national framework for promoting business excellence (NFPBE) using a quality management assessment framework (QMAF) with information knowledge communication (IKC) as an enabler.

The NFPBE using the plan–do–check–act (PDCA) cycle is developed, re-enforcing key quality management aspects/areas including national quality awards, QMAF summary and national innovation programmes using a meta-analysis.

The operationalising of the NFPBE is enabled and supported by an auditing tool to assess the degree of mentoring provided by universities/research institutions/consulting firms to participating firms whose progress will be assessed by the QMAF. It was emphasised that the success of the framework requires the buy-in of national governments to support the programme through stimulus incentives such as government assistance with the costs of research and development, and cooperative research ventures between universities and companies.

The framework is conceptualised into a process flowchart, which is a blueprint to advancing business excellence in organisations at a national scale. The study is limited to only the conceptualisation of the framework. Therefore, an extended study of the framework implementation/application is required for revealing implementation guidelines.

The national framework has a propensity to enhancing the business excellence of organisations at a national level. Therefore, quality managers and policy makers could use the framework to understand the quality management shortfalls and consider strategies to achieving business excellence.

This research study proposed a blueprint to advancing quality excellence in organisations at a national level, guided by several quality frameworks.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of design for lean six sigma (DFLSS) on operational functions of the innovation management model by appraising an innovation management assessment framework.

An empirical approach for evaluating causal relationships among various constructs in the model phases that identify optimum pathways in achieving commercial success was adopted. A quantitative analysis of survey data were collected from large, medium and small organiations, including incubators in ANZ (Australia, New Zealand) and TMSV (Thailand, Malaysia, Sri Lanka and Vietnam).

The structural equation modelling recursive path analysis results of the model provide empirical evidence and pathways through the various constructs considered in the model. All these pathways lead to delivering optimum commercialization success (CS). Furthermore, DFLSS is confirmed as an enabler and has direct one-to-one and indirect influence on all the operational function constructs of the model including commercial success.

This study had a relatively small sample size of completed responses obtained from the population and a constrained ability to compare commercialization success (CS) between the two regions in the dataset. Future studies could be conducted on a global scale to increase responses.

The research findings enabled the development of important and practical guidelines for managers and innovation practitioners engaged in planning and management of innovation.

This research offers a holistic approach for integrating DFLSS with stage gate phases of innovation management assessment framework, supported by empirical evidence, to aid organizations in effectively managing the innovation process and achieving greater success in commercialization.

The purpose of this paper is to, using a quality management assessment framework (QMAF), provide a comparative analysis of quality management capabilities of organisations categorised by size and groups, based on the Australian and New Zealand Standard Industrial Classification (ANZSIC) code.

A questionnaire-based survey was used for data collection. Statistical data analysis, including descriptive statistics, multivariate and univariate analysis of variance and Hsu’s multiple comparisons with/to the best post-hoc test results, was carried out to identify significant differences and similarities in total quality management capabilities between organisations based on the QMAF model.

Significant differences in quality management capabilities were identified between large organisations and SMEs while no significant differences were found to exist between medium- and small-size organisations. Most of the QMAF-based capabilities do not seem to show significant differences between the four groups of ANZSIC code of firms, except for partnering focus and business outcomes.

The research was limited by the number of returned responses of survey questionnaire from manufacturing organisations in the Greater Western Sydney region. This research provides practitioners with practical guidelines for improving quality management capabilities and can become the basis for comparative analysis in other regions of Australia, and globally. In addition, the research findings can be used by government and quality associations to develop appropriate strategies and policies for supporting the development of quality enhancing programmes in SMEs.

The comparative analysis of quality management capabilities by organisational size and industry type advances the previous work on optimum pathways of achieving business outcomes using the QMAF model. In addition, the research has mapped out differences in quality management capabilities, based on a combined scope of size and industry type, especially in the Greater Western Sydney region where a large number of SMEs are located.

This paper proposes an integrated approach for assessing innovation management practices using an innovation management assessment framework, with the application of the innovation management assessment framework at the incubation and firm level.

Innovation management assessment framework is developed, based on the literature review. An innovation management assessment framework toolkit for training innovation practitioners is proposed as the basis for the framework implementation in the industry. The main approach is to make close alignment of the design for lean six sigma phases within broader innovation and stage-gate model in the innovation management assessment framework.

The operationalization of the innovation management assessment framework is enabled and supported by an assessment framework and a toolkit for managing innovation.

A roadmap for innovation management and assessment of performance at incubatee/firm level.

It provides a tool for developing innovative products and services for incubatees in start-ups, thus fueling the economy. It also has applications for ongoing established businesses.

Innovation of new business development can be made through a well-designed and implemented innovation programme that is aligned with stage-gate and design for lean six sigma phases through the innovation management assessment framework.