International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management

Emerald Article: A self-assessed quality management system based on integration of MBNQA/ISO 9000/ISO 14000 K.F. Pun, K.S. Chin, Henry Lau

Article information:
To cite this document: K.F. Pun, K.S. Chin, Henry Lau, (1999),"A self-assessed quality management system based on integration of MBNQA/ISO 9000/ISO 14000", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 16 Iss: 6 pp. 606 - 629 Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656719910268206 Downloaded on: 15-01-2013 References: This document contains references to 33 other documents Citations: This document has been cited by 19 other documents To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com This document has been downloaded 1504 times since 2005. *

Users who downloaded this Article also downloaded: *

K.F. Pun, K.S. Chin, Henry Lau, (1999),"A self-assessed quality management system based on integration of MBNQA/ISO 9000/ISO 14000", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 16 Iss: 6 pp. 606 - 629 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656719910268206 K.F. Pun, K.S. Chin, Henry Lau, (1999),"A self-assessed quality management system based on integration of MBNQA/ISO 9000/ISO 14000", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 16 Iss: 6 pp. 606 - 629 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656719910268206 K.F. Pun, K.S. Chin, Henry Lau, (1999),"A self-assessed quality management system based on integration of MBNQA/ISO 9000/ISO 14000", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 16 Iss: 6 pp. 606 - 629 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656719910268206

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DEL PERU For Authors: If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service. Information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com With over forty years' experience, Emerald Group Publishing is a leading independent publisher of global research with impact in business, society, public policy and education. In total, Emerald publishes over 275 journals and more than 130 book series, as well as an extensive range of online products and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 3 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at http://www.emerald-library.com

IJQRM 16,6

606
Received March 1998 Revised January 1999

A self-assessed quality management system based on integration of MBNQA/ ISO 9000/ISO 14000
City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong
Keywords Baldrige Award, ISO 9000, Self-assessment, Quality systems Abstract With the proliferation of several quality awards and standards, many organisations have taken their initiatives to employ different awards and standards in one form or another to sustain competitive edge. The ultimate objective of a self-assessed quality management system (SQMS) is to assist the organisation in its quest for corporate performance, business results and financial health. It can be achieved through proceduralising organisational activities and increasing uniformity and conformity of repeated tasks. This paper presents the compatibility of assessment criteria of the Baldrige Award with the conformity requirements of both ISO 9000 and ISO 14000. A SQMS is built upon these criteria and requirements. The core concepts and skeleton of the system are explained, and its applicability is illustrated with reference to an implementation case in an engineering organisation in Hong Kong.

K.F. Pun and K.S. Chin Henry Lau

International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 16 No. 6, 1999, pp. 606-629. # MCB University Press, 0256-671X

Introduction Significant shifts in competitive edge have been sharpening the needs for continuous improvements and breakthroughs on quality. Many companies have taken their initiatives to employ different quality awards and standards in one form or another to document, implement quality assurance practices and verify continued compliance. For instance, the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA) in the United States of America, the European Quality Award (EQA) in Western Europe and Australian Quality Award (AQA) in Australia, are some of the prestigious awards recently established with a view towards increasing the quality awareness and competitiveness in their respective countries (Tummala and Tang, 1994; van der Wiele et al., 1997). Of the established series of quality standards, ISO 9000 have since 1987 been adopted as the referred or national standards for quality management system in many countries and regions. Companies that document and implement quality assurance practices to conform with the ISO 9000 standards would be awarded ISO 9001, ISO 9002 or ISO 9003 Certification (ISO, 1994a; BSI, 1994). These awards and standards are commonly adopted as a means of recognising the achievements of total quality management (TQM). Some empirical studies also found that there has been a strategic quality movement to integrate both ISO 9000 and TQM practices (Chin et al., 1995). Moreover, the increasing

awareness of the environmental compliance requirements has also imposed pressures on business enterprises in industry. ISO 14000 has gone through a very rapid process for the world to agree upon an environmental management standard comparable to the ISO 9000 quality management standard (ISO, 1996a and 1996b; Kuhre, 1995; Hale, 1997). With the emergence of ISO 14000, companies with business units certified to ISO 9000 should consider the possibility of integrating the two management systems and also incorporating safety and health standards (Struebing, 1996; Hale, 1997; Beechner and Koch, 1997; ISO, 1988). This scenario necessitated the management efforts to build an integrated system with the TQM-based framework that can link selfassessment to business performance and competitiveness. This paper presents the compatibility of assessment criteria of the Baldrige Award with the conformity requirements of both ISO 9000 and ISO 14000. A self-assessed quality management system (SQMS) is built upon these criteria and requirements. The core concepts and skeleton of the system are explained, and its applicability is illustrated with reference to an implementation case in an engineering organisation in Hong Kong. Transformation journey of quality management system Systems for improving and managing quality have evolved rapidly in recent years (Tummala and Tang, 1994; van der Wiele et al., 1997). Reduction of variation, continuous improvement of products and services, design quality, speed and prevention, zero defects, cost of poor quality, leadership, people participation and partnership, cross functional management, systematic approach to quality and strategic focus with respect to customer satisfaction, competitiveness, profitability, quality planning and organisation-wide commitment are the major concepts and factors that are introduced by quality gurus, like Deming, Juran, Crosby, Feigenbaum, Ishikawa and Garvin in one form or another in managing quality (Tummala and Tang, 1994). These quality concepts and factors have been translated into the assessment criteria, core elements and values of various quality awards (such as MBNQA, EQA and AQA) and standards (such as ISO 9000 and ISO 14000). During the past decades, simple inspection activities have been replaced or supplemented by quality control, quality assurance has been developed and refined. Most companies are now taking initiatives with the ISO 9000 quality assurance system and working towards total quality management (Dale, 1994; Chin et al., 1995; van der Wiele et al., 1997). ISO 9000 focuses on the conformity to practices specified in registrants' own quality system. Its disciplines imposed on calibration, document control and internal audit ensure a company operating efficiently with the current system, and in turn, facilitate quality improvement. However, there has been a widely held view that ISO 9000 is weak on continuous improvement (Chin et al., 1995; Pun, 1998). Reliance solely on the ISO 9000 registration is not sufficient to sustain competitive edge. Quality-led companies need to continuously improve or breakthrough their operational performance at every level and in all functional areas. TQM-

Self-assessed quality management 607

IJQRM 16,6

608

oriented assessment criteria can drive them towards the continual maintenance, development and improvement of overall operation performance and the delivery of ever-improving values to customers. Furthermore, the emerging issues of clean production and environmental protection also force companies to respond through their self-initiatives. Managing the cost of doing business with environmental and safety concerns has become an integral part of a comprehensive, overall business strategy (Florida, 1996; Rondinelli and Vastag, 1996; Wever, 1996). With the myriad of different management system standards inundating organisations, it is time to merge them wherever practicable. Quality products and services can be delivered best when all of an organisation's systems are efficient and focused on the same target (Beechner and Koch, 1997). However, when there is a collection of ad hoc systems or standards from different areas, efficiency is difficult and misperceptions and confusion often occur. It is thus best to eliminate potential confusion and suboptimisation from the outset by establishing and maintaining a total systems approach (Beechner and Roch, 1997). A self-assessed quality management system (SQMS) that can integrate the TQM-oriented assessment requirements with the conformity of the quality and environmental standards can better accommodate today's sharpening needs of quality performance. Once they are integrated, the organisation just needs to adhere to and maintain the system to keep it running smoothly. A brief overview of MBNQA, ISO 9000 and ISO 14000 The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA) was created by an act of Congress in 1987 to stimulate quality awareness in the USA. Awards are made annually to recognise quality winners for performance excellence, and may be given in each of three eligibility categories such as manufacturing companies, service companies and small businesses (Brown, 1996; NIST, 1998). The Award aims to promote the understanding of the requirements for performance excellence and competitiveness improvement, the sharing of information on successful performance strategies and the benefits derived from using these strategies (NIST, 1998). It establishes a self-assessment benchmark against which improvement can be measured and verified. This is a systematic assessment of an organisation's overall activities conducted for the purpose of evaluating performance, identifying areas for improvement, and developing recommendations and plans for further action. Award applicants are evaluated on seven major categories of quality criteria, including Leadership, Strategic Planning, Customer and Market Focus, Information and Analysis, Human Resource Focus, Process Management and Business Results. These assessment criteria share a maximum score of 1,000 points and are designed to be flexible and inclusive of a wide variety of quality systems. They are used by organisations of all kinds for self-assessment, planning, training and other purposes (NIST, 1998). The assessment scores are derived from the company's performance against systematic questioning for these categories, in terms of

their approach to the requirements of each category, the deployment of their efforts across the company as a whole and also of the results achieved (NIST, 1998). The Award framework for the quality process has built into four components, including the driver, system, measures of progress and the goal. They help assess the performance of organisations in line with these award categories (Brown, 1996; Affisco et al., 1997). The Award is concerned with quality and customer satisfaction and is based on TQM-oriented criteria and allows self-assessment on an ongoing basis and as a measuring stick for performance comparison with other organisations. Recent significant development of the Award have made the change in emphasis from achieving customer satisfaction to improving performance and the setting of a standard for business excellence. Award recipients may publicise and advertise receipt of the Award, and are expected to share information about their successful performance strategies with other organisations (NIST, 1998). The ISO 9000 series of standards The ISO 9000 series of quality assurance standards, consisting of ISO 9000, ISO 9001, ISO 9002, ISO 9003 and ISO 9004, were issued in 1987 and revised in 1994 by the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO, 1994a, 1994b). They are based on the concept that certain minimum characteristics of quality management system can be usefully standardised, giving mutual benefit to suppliers and customers alike (BSI, 1994; Affisco et al., 1997). In simple terms, the objectives of the ISO 9000 series are to give purchasers an assurance that the quality of the products and services provided by a supplier meet their requirements. The series defines and sets out a definitive list of features and characteristics that it is considered should be present in an organisation's management control system through documented policies, manual and procedures, which help to ensure that quality is built into a process. The ISO 9000 series consists of five individual standards divided into four parts. They provide guidelines for companies to develop an effective quality system that can reflect their practices of producing goods and services, and conform to specified requirements in order to enhance and facilitate trade (ISO, 1994a; BSI, 1994; Mahoney and Thor, 1994). ISO 9000 describes the use of a particular standard, and ISO 9004 describes the establishment of an internal quality management system within the broad and general context of TQM. They are considered as one part of the series and are intended only as guidelines. The other three standards, such as ISO 9001, ISO 9002 and ISO 9003, are the generic standards containing minimum requirements for establishing and maintaining a documented quality system to instil confidence in customer requirements. In other words, they are the contractual standards between suppliers and customers. Of them, ISO 9001 is the most comprehensive standard that covers circumstances in which an organisation is responsible for design and development, production, installation and servicing. It contains 20 clauses of system requirements that set forth the practical guidelines to establish and maintain a documented quality system in meeting customer requirements (ISO,

Self-assessed quality management 609

IJQRM 16,6

610

1994b). If a company is engaged in production and installation only, then it can use ISO 9002 to establish and maintain a documented quality system, whereas it can use ISO 9003 if it is engaged only in final inspection and test (BSI, 1994; Mahoney and Thor, 1994). In 1998, a new version of ISO 9001: 2000 quality management system requirements was being drafted. Guidance on the development of a complete quality management system for improvement of the organisation, going beyond the requirements for conformity of product and/or service, is also available in a draft ISO 9004: 2000 quality management system guideline (ISO, 1998). The new version of ISO 9000 series would look further at compatibility with other management system disciplines such as environmental management, occupational health and safety management and financial management (ISO, 1998). The ISO 14000 series of standards Products that are environmentally friendly in production and in use may have greater appeal in the marketplace. ISO 14000 is composed of two groups of standards which have been launched in 1996 (ISO, 1996a). The first group includes ISO 14001 and ISO 14004 that are concerned with establishing guidelines and principles for the management of environmental matters by organisations through the establishment and operation of environmental management systems (EMS) (ISO, 1996a and 1996b). The remaining three standards (such as ISO 14010, ISO 14011 and ISO 14012) are guidelines for environmental auditing that deal with analysing and characterising the environmental attributes of products (ISO, 1996c, 1996d, 1996e). These standards are designed to help organisations develop and implement a formalised management process, and evaluate the effectiveness of their activities, operations, products and services to improve environmental and safety performance (Kuhre, 1995). The ISO 14001 EMS draw its core elements from proven management systems as that of the ISO 9000 series, such as management by objectives, organisational development models, and continuous improvement to measure, review, perform root-cause analysis and take corrective action. It provides a management framework for planning, developing and implementing strategies and related programmes in an organisation. The ISO 14000 series stresses continual improvement and dynamic ``plan-do-check-act'' process, and requires organizations to evaluate their current and potential environmental exposures in terms of impact and compliance with legislation (Kuhre, 1995; Wever, 1996; ISO, 1996a). Comparisons among the MBNQA, ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 Facing increasing marketplace challenges, many organisations realise that total quality is essential and protecting the environment is also required for improving the quality of life. Some recent studies showed that there is synergy among MBNQA, ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 (Affisco et al., 1997; Beechner and Koch, 1997; Pun, 1998). Table I presents the comparisons among the MBNQA and the ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 standards at a macro level. Although there are

Dimensions

Malcolm Baldrige Quality Award

ISO 9001: 1994 standard

ISO 14001: 1996 standard

Purposes

Emphasis

Effectively documenting the quality systems elements to be implemented or in place needed to ensure an ability to perform Voluntary registration by an accredited third party Validate supplier ability and capability to perform according to contract

Eligibility

Promote quality awareness, performance excellence and competitiveness improvement, share information on successful performance strategies and the benefits derived Customer satisfaction through continuous quality improvement, and setting of a standard for business excellence. Organisations only (limited to the USA)

Participants

Evaluation

Orientation

Mechanics

Assist organisations to achieve environmental performance by managing and evaluating environmental aspects of operations. Third party registration and/or self-declaration Establish environmental management systems (EMS) to foster environmental protection and sustainable development This is generic and independent of any Any organisations (regardless of size, type specific industry or economic sector. It is and level of maturity) that are interested in applicable to all types and sizes of the development, implementation and organisations maintenance of their EMS Maximum of two manufacturing companies Organisations wish to develop their quality Organisations desiring to certify their (plus their divisions), two small companies systems and to meet the vendor environmental perfomance to an audit (fewer than 500 employees) and two service requirement as specified in contracts, client. Organisations may include companies especially those wishing to have trades with companies, divisions operations and facilites EC countries and the USA Seven categories of criteria include Specification for design, development, Does not state specific environmental leadership, strategic planning, customer and production, installation and servicing. It performance criteria. Five basic elements market focus, information and analysis, contains 20 principal clauses that include (environmental policy, planning, human resource focus, process management management responsibilities, quality implementation and operation, checking and and business results. 1000 points allocated system, contract review, design control, corrective action and management review) over 20 sub-criteria document control and others are required Result (65 per cent) plus process (35 per Process (80 per cent) plus management and Share common management system cent). Heavy on business results (450 scores) administration (20 per cent). Heavy on principles with the ISO 9000 series. Heavy and leadership (110 scores) quality assurance initiatives and conformity on continual improvement and complience of clauses with legislation Self-assessment, performance measurement Select registration/certification agency, Select registration/ certification agency and and audit, qualification for site visit and choose standard, submit a quality manual, commission EMS audits, perform on-site competition conduct external quality audits and obtain assessment and obtain certification certification

Table I. Macro level comparison among MBNQA, ISO 9001 and ISO 14001

Self-assessed quality management 611

IJQRM 16,6

612

differences in the requirements of many aspects (such as purposes, emphasis, eligibility, participants, evaluation criteria, orientation and mechanics), they are so intertwined that they require better integration for business results. For instance, according to the study of Affisco et al. (1997), organisations that have developed quality management systems (QMS) using the MBNQA criteria as a guide should benefit from this when developing an EMS because of the many similarities among them. Those organisations that have achieved ISO 9000 certification should also benefit from this effort when developing the implementation and operation, and checking and corrective action elements of an EMS (Affisco et al., 1997). However, this is still open to debate since there is a lot of evidence to show that ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 have in many cases been introduced with little awareness of TQM, and this has not changed following introduction of the standards. To integrate MBNQA with ISO 9001 and ISO 14001, each award criterion need to be examined. The organisation should then determine how to embed the ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 elements into the associated award criteria and how to integrate the self-assessment requirements into a performance management system framework. Table II provides a cross-reference of where specific requirements are found in the award criteria and both of the standards. The table is largely self-exploratory and shows that a high level of congruence exists among the evaluation criteria of MBNQA and the conformity elements of ISO 9001 and ISO 14001. The emphasis of MBNQA is on achieving customer satisfaction through continuous quality improvement and setting of a standard for business excellence (NIST, 1998). The core values and concepts of MBNQA are embodied in seven categories of award criteria. Leadership (Category 1), Strategic Planning (Category 2) and Customer and Market Focus (Category 3) represent the leadership triad and have a total score of 270 points. They emphasise the importance of a leadership focus on strategy and customers, and underline that senior leaders must set company direction and seek future opportunities for the company. Human Resources Focus (Category 5), Process Management (Category 6) and Business Results (Category 7) represent the result triad and have a total score of 650 points. They stress the company's employee and key processes to accomplish the work of the organisation that yields its business results. Information and Analysis (Category 4) has a score of 80 points, and serves as a foundation for analysing the performance management system that is critical for improving company performance and competitiveness. These seven criteria are made up of results-oriented requirements and focus on business results. Moreover, they support goal-based diagnosis and adopt a systems approach to maintaining company-wide goal alignment (NIST, 1998). A foundation for performance improvement is a selfassessment orientation and this is achieved through a heavy weight on business results in the scoring system (Reimann and Hertz, 1993; Affisco et al., 1997; NIST, 1998). Regarding the ISO 9001 standard, it is merely process and customer focused, and relies on the ability of organisations to perform in accordance with the contracts with their customers. A heavy orientation

Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award 1998 criteria (point values): 4.1.1 4.2.1 4.2.3 4.3.2

ISO 9001: 1994 Standard Clause references:

ISO 14001: 1996 Standard Clause references:

1. Leadership (110) 2. Strategic planning (80)

3. Customer and market focus (80)

4. Information and analysis (80)

5. Human resource focus (100)

6. Process management (100)

4.2 4.1 4.3 4.3.1 4.3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.4.3 4.6 4.4.4 4.4.5 4.4 4.4.1 4.4.2 4.4.6 4.4.6 4.4.6 4.4.6 4.4.6 4.4.6 4.5 4.5.1 4.5.1 4.5.2 4.4.7 4.4.6

Environmental policy General requirements Planning Environmental aspects Legal and other requirements Objectives and targets Environmental management programme(s) Communication Management review Environmental documentaion Document control Implementation and operation Structure and responsibility Training, awareness and competence Operational control Operational control Operational control Operational control Operational control Operational control Checking and corrective action Monitoring and measurement Monitoring and measurement Nonconformance and corrective and preventive action Emergency prepareness and response Operational control

7. Business results (450)

Quality policy General Quality planning Responsibility and authority (Legal requirements addressed in 4.4.4) (Objectives addressed in 4.1.1) 4.2.2 Quality planning 4.3 Contract review (communication with stakeholders) 4.1.3 Management review 4.5 Document and data control 4.2.2 Quality system procedures 4.1.2 Organisation 4.1.2 Organisation 4.18 Training 4.3 Contract review 4.4 Design control 4.6 Purchasing 4.7 Control of customer-supplied product 4.8 Product identification and traceability 4.9 Process control 4.10 Inspection and testing 4.11 Control of inspection, measuring and test equipment 4.12 Inspection and test status 4.13 Control of nonconforming product 4.14 Corrective and preventive action 4.15 Handling, storage, packaging, preservation and delivery 4.16 Control of quality records 4.17 Internal quality audits 4.19 Servicing 4.20 Statistical techniques 4.1.3 Management review 4.5.3 4.5.4 4.4.6 4.5.1 4.6 Records Environmental management system audit Operational control Monitoring and measurement Management review

Table II. Cross-reference of the MBNQA criteria and the ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 elements

Self-assessed quality management 613

IJQRM 16,6

614

towards operating processes is emphasised in the standard (Affisco et al., 1997). To a great extent, ISO 9001 thus forms a major part of Process Management (Category 6) of MBNQA. On the other hand, the focus of ISO 14001 is put on the development and implementation of an environmental management system (EMS). It addresses the needs of a broad range of interested parties and the evolving needs of society for environmental protection and sustainable development. EMS audits of organisations may be commissioned internally or by external regulatory or contractual entities, and they stress primarily the environmental policies and the performance in achieving them (Affisco et al., 1997). ISO 14001 also contributes significantly to the process management as required in Category 6 of MBNQA. The design of both ISO 9001 QMS and ISO 14001 EMS is an ongoing, interactive process that consists of defining, documenting and improving on the required capabilities. ISO 9001 provides a structure for defining and implementing a baseline quality assurance system that is essential for launching continuous improvement processes and techniques. Similarly, the emphasis of a successful EMS is on continuous improvement in achieving an environmental policy that is grounded in the concepts of pollution prevention and sustainable development (Cascio, 1996; Affisco et al., 1997). A documented system is thus a fundamental requirement for MBNQA, ISO 9001 and ISO 14001. The structure, responsibilities, practices, procedures, processes and resources for implementing quality and environmental policies, objectives and targets should be co-ordinated with existing efforts in other functional areas of the organisation. Many of the ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 standard requirements can easily be added to the existing documented procedures for MBNQA; only a few clauses require their own procedures (Beecher and Koch, 1997). Moreover, separate audits for ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 may not be needed because of similarities in structure and documentation between them. However, some additional assessment activity and effort on the part of the auditing team may be required to evaluate a management system that has been expanded to cover more aspects of a company's operations. Specific work still remains to be done to develop a plan for reconciling the disparate impact on organisations of failing to fulfil the MBNQA criteria and obtain the ISO 9001 registration versus non-compliance with environmental regulations (Affisco et al., 1997). Both ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 constitute an integral part of an organisation's overall management system. When blended with the MBNQA criteria, together they provide a reasonable framework to help an organisation achieve functional clarity and reach its goals. They also place a great emphasis on self-assessment in achieving quality and business performance, business results and management excellence. Building a self-assessed quality management system There are significant opportunities for integrating MBNQA with ISO 9001 and ISO 14001. The principles of TQM as implemented with the MBNQA criteria can be used as an umbrella under which the integration can proceed along with

efficient self-assessment. According to the European Foundation for Quality Management, self-assessment is a comprehensive and regular review of an organisation's activities and results against a systematic model of business excellence (EFQM, 1997). The assessment process allows the organisation to discern clearly its strengths and the areas in which improvements can be made and culminates in planned improvement actions that are monitored for progress. It allows an organisation to monitor on a regular basis what activities are going well, those which have stagnated and what needs to be improved (Beasley, 1994; van der Wiele et al., 1997). The building of a self-assessed quality management system (SQMS) should start with well-defined corporate values and mission so that all stakeholders can visualise the commitment, culture and core values of an organisation. Figure 1 shows the logic flow of the building and development of the proposed SQMS. Senior management should initiate their leadership, and develop clear company goals and quality objectives consistent with the company's mission. Core quality concepts and elements (such as leadership, strategic quality planning, design quality, speed and prevention, people participation and partnership, fact-based management, continuous improvement, and customer focus and satisfaction) would then be identified, and together as a system addressed to well-defined and designed processes. These processes would encompass the planning of new products or services with zero defects, employee and supplier involvement and participation, training and education, rewards and recognition as well as the quality of work environment (Pun, 1998). Competitive performance evaluations and benchmarking would directly address continuous improvements and changing customer requirements, with the aid of analytical tools and problem-solving techniques (such as statistical tools, cause-and-effect diagrams and relations diagrams). The findings would then be used to formulate a process management plan that interweaves the objectives, strategies and implementation aspects of quality programmes, projects and tasks. Both the environmental and the safety and health standards would be included along the conformity requirements of the ISO 9000 Certification as they are all embraced by TQM philosophy. The company can then document quality policies, processes and procedures into the system, and use them as a platform for continuously improving the quality of products or services that customers want (Pun, 1998). Having regard to the different business situations, the management can decide on either taking small-step process improvements using Kaizen approach, or radical process changes using Business Process Re-engineering or both depending on whether they may be needed separately and collectively. In integrating a self-assessed QMS, organisations should concentrate and build on what already exists, as opposed to developing large manuals and operating procedures for each SQMS sub-element. They should also put crossfunctional teams to perform systems integration on the documentation side and incorporate quality, environmental and safety issues effectively (Beechner and

Self-assessed quality management 615

IJQRM 16,6
System Planning Senior executive leadership

Define corporate vision and mission Develop company goals and objectives

Organisational environments, resources and constraints/ limitations

616
Core concepts (e.g. customer-focus, and continuous improvements) Conduct assurance, performance analysis System Integration Evauation criteria and guidelines Quality assurance, environmental protection and safety requirements

Identify critical sucess factors Determine critical processes Formulate process management plan

Strategic planning alignment and benchmarking Employ quality improvement tools and techniques

Develop integrated quality management programmes Incorporate key elements of quality and environmental management systems

Operation, finance, markets and legal concerns Quality improvement, environmental conservation and safety concerns

System Installation

Use Kaizen small-step process improvement

Adopt big-step business process reengineering

Document control

Install a self-assessed quality management system Streamline system execution and development

Management reviews and audits

Feedback and System refinement

Figure 1. Logic flow of SQMS building and development

Achieve business results and performance excellence

Koch, 1997; McCully, 1997b). Detailed system implementation should be planned, taking in the SQMS criteria and the considerations of time schedules, budgets and resource allocation. To avoid falling into the trap of developing separate and distinct procedures for each function that has no link to other facets of the integrated system, effective management reviews and audits of the self-assessment results can help streamline the SQMS development process (Hale, 1997). Moreover, possible feedback can recycle back to the planning and integration stages for further refinement of the SQMS building and development. Apart from those technical aspects, the management commitment and employee involvement efforts are governing the success of SQMS. Proper building and development of SQMS can help organisations to better safeguard their sustainable business results and achieve performance improvement and excellence. A systems perspective of SQMS The SQMS adopts the evaluation principles and framework compatible to that of MBNQA (Brown, 1996; Pun, 1998). However, in order to have wider system integrity, the SQMS extends its categories of evaluation criteria from seven to ten. They include Senior Executive Leadership, Strategic Planning and Alignment, Customer Value and Market Focus, Strategic Information and Analysis, Human Resource Focus, Process Analysis and Management, Operations and Business Results, Employee Satisfaction, Supplier Quality and Relationship and Environmental Impact on Society (Pun, 1998). These criteria have 33 sub-criteria, and are primarily designed for self-assessment of a company's performance on an ongoing basis and internal benchmarking of business results. They are built upon the core quality concepts and integrate with each other in the SQMS framework, as illustrated in Figure 2. The use of SQMS can also be extended for external comparisons with other organisations that adopt similar self-assessment principles and framework. Apart from the integrated system ingredients of ISO 9001 and ISO 14001, the SQMS process has four critical elements, including the driver, the system, the measures of progress and the goal. These elements govern the operations of SQMS as that of MBNQA (Brown, 1996; NIST, 1998). Senior Executive Leadership is the driver. It creates the core SQMS concepts that drive the sustained pursuit of customer value and improvement in corporate performance. In other words, if the management does not want self-assessment to happen, it will not happen. The system comprises the well-defined and designed processes for meeting customer, quality and performance requirements. It addresses four SQMS criteria that include Process Analysis and Management, Human Resource Development and Management, Strategic Planning and Alignment as well as Strategic Information and Analysis. They stress the company's employee and key processes to attain business results and improve business performance. The measures of progress provide a resultsoriented basis for channelling actions to delivering ever-improving Customer Value and Market Focus and company performance in Employee Satisfaction,

Self-assessed quality management 617

618

IJQRM 16,6

Figure 2. A systems perspective of SQMS

System Measures of Progress Goal 2. Senior Planning and Alignment (90 points) Self-assessed Quality Management System 3. Customer Value and Market Focus (80 points) Core Values Customer Satisfaction 4. Senior Information and Analysis (80 points) + Environmental Protection Requirements + Safety and Health Requirements Quality Assurance Requirements 7. Operations and Business Result (270 points) Customer Retention Market Share Gain 8. Employee Satisfaction (70 points) Financial and Productivity Improvement 9. Supplier Quality and Relationship (60 points) Waste Reduction and Elimination Safety and Environmental Performance 5. Human Resource Focus (100 points) 6. Process Analysis and Management (100 points) 10. Environmental Impact on Society (50 points)

Driver

1.

Senior Exective Leadership (110 points)

Core Concepts

Fact-Based Management

People Participation

Quality Performance

Customer Focus

Continuous Improvement

Supplier Quality and Relationship, Operations and Business Results as well as Environmental Impact on Society. Moreover, the setting of a self-assessment standard for business excellence is the goal of the whole SQMS process in relation to improving business performance, satisfying customers' requirements, gaining new customers and increasing market shares. Furthermore, the scores of SQMS criteria are adjusted to give a total score of 1,000 points as adopted by MBNQA (Pun, 1998). Table III depicts a score listing of the SQMS criteria versus the MBNQA criteria. Following the TQM-oriented evaluation principles adopted by MBQNA, the SQMS criteria are derived based on the company's performance, in terms of the evaluation requirements of the system, the deployment of the company's efforts and resources and also the operations and business results achieved. Both MBNQA and SQMS criteria are result-oriented, and used to measure performance on a wide range of key business performance indicators (such as customer, product and service, operational and financial). However, SQMS is primarily tailored to help organisations to achieve efficient self-assessment of their performance, and this does not necessarily lead to applying any awards like MBNQA. As compared to MBNQA, the SQMS criteria address specified self-assessment requirements on Business Results and other categories of criteria (such as Strategic Planning, Customer Value and Market Focus, Information and Analysis and Process Management) though their assigned scores are largely the same. SQMS uses four individual criteria of Operations and Business Results, Employee Satisfaction, Supplier Quality and Relationship, and Environmental Impact on Society to assess the overall performance of business results as that of Category 7 in MBNQA. SQMS also relocates the assigned scores of certain evaluation sub-criteria and adds new elements (such as alignment of business processes, determining customer requirements, documentation and audit, continuous improvement of processes and others) to reflect the importance of individual criteria. The scoring mechanism of SQMS can provide an objective self-assessment that helps gain consensus on the strengths and weaknesses of the current practices and pinpoint improvement and breakthrough opportunities for the organisations. In addition, SQMS is developed to be compatible with other management system disciplines. Both internal and external benchmarking and organisational learning can also be facilitated. The SQMS criteria can thus provide a feasible self-assessment framework aiming for performance excellence. Implementation of SQMS A SQMS cannot be implemented overnight and with little thought. Various elements and practices have got to be in place, and management needs to understand the questions underpinning the quality management system on which self-assessment is being made. What has not been implemented cannot be assessed, and zero scoring is self-defeating and de-motivating. The entire organisation or individual functions can be discouraged as a result of low scores, or there can be a tendency to score higher against the SQMS criteria.

Self-assessed quality management 619

IJQRM 16,6

Self-assessed quality management system Malcolm Baldrige national quality award The SQMS criteria Point values 1998 Categories/Items Point values 1. Senior executive leadership 1.1 Leadership system 1.2 Company responsibility and citizenship 2. Strategic planning and alignment 2.1 Strategy development process 2.2 Company strategy 2.3 Alignment of business processes 3. Customer value and market focus 3.1 Customer and market knowledge 3.2 Customer satisfaction and relationship enhancement 3.3 Determining customer requirements 4. Stategic information and analysis 4.1 Management of information and data 4.2 Selection and use of comparative information and data 4.3 Analysis and review of company performance 4.4 Documentation and audit 5. Human resource focus 5.1 Work systems 5.2 Employee education, training and development 5.3 Employee well-being and satisfaction 6. Process analysis and management 6.1 Management of business processes 6.2 Management of support processes 6.3 Management of supplier partnering 6.4 Continuous improvement of processes 7. Operations and business results 7.1 Customer satisfaction results 7.2 Financial and market results 7.3 Competitive benchmark 7.4 Review of company performance 7.5 Company-specific results 8. Employee satisfaction 8.1 Human resource results 8.2 Recognition and measurement 8.3 Involvement, well-being and morale 8.4 Safety and hygiene 9. Supplier quality and relationship 9.1 Supplier and partner results 9.2 Supplier relationship enhancement 9.3 Supplier service standards 10. Environmental impact on society 10.1 Public and social responsibilities 10.2 Environment protection/ conservation Total: Source: Pun (1998) and NIST (1998) (110) 80 30 80 30 30 20 (80) 40 25 15 (80) 25 15 25 15 (100) 40 30 30 (100) 40 20 20 20 (270) 70 100 30 30 40 (70) 20 20 15 15 (60) 30 15 15 (15) 35 15 1000 1. Leadership 1.1 Leadership system 1.2 Company responsiblity and citizenship 2. Strategic planning 2.1 Stategy development process 2.2 Company strategy 3. Customer value and market focus 3.1 Customer and market knowledge 3.2 Customer satisfaction and relationship enhancement 4. Information and analysis 4.1 Selection and use of information and data 4.2 Selection and use of comparative information and data 4.3 Analysis and review of company performance 5. Human resource focus 5.1 Work systems 5.2 Employee education, training and development 5.3 Employee well-being and satisfaction 6. Process management 6.1 Management of product and service processes 6.2 Management of support processes 6.3 Management of supplier and partnering processes 7. 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 Business results Customer satisfaction results Financial and market results Human resource results Supplier and partner results Company-specific results (110) 80 30 (80) 40 40 (80) 40 40 (80) 25 15 40 (100) 40 30 30 (100) 60 20 20

620

(450) 125 100 50 25 125

Table III. Comparison between SQMS criteria and MBNQA criteria

Total:

1000

Both over-optimistic and under-pessimistic pictures could be created, and internal auditors may not have sufficient experience to know what they are talking about and looking for. Research and practical evidence point to the fact that improper self-assessments can cause organisations to be pushed along blind alleys and to take initiatives which are not suited to their current state of TQM development (Beasley, 1994; van der Wiele et al., 1997). Therefore, the implementation of SQMS demands a serious investment in resources, and it will take time to develop an approach throughout the organisation that fits the specific situation of the company. There is a pressing need for a structured approach to implementing the SQMS in a way that guides all critical elements towards the level of business excellence defined by the management. Fourteen steps are identified to help organisations to encapsulate the conformity requirements of quality and environmental management systems into the way their business is managed (Pun, 1998). Figure 3 shows a logical sequence of these steps within the SQMS process. The sequence also allows comprehension recycles and feedback of individual steps regarding performance improvements and breakthroughs in the process. Internal benchmarking and external comparison of self-assessment results are also made possible with the SQMS criteria. In the ensuing section, an implementation case of SQMS is described incorporating these 14 steps. SQMS implementation: an application case Established in 1990, the Manufacturing Engineering Laboratories (MEL) of City University of Hong Kong have gone through a number of structural and organisational expansions to become a complex organisational entity. The laboratories have at present a floor area of about 3,500 square metres with hitech equipment worth over seven millions of US dollars and have more than 30 technical staff. These laboratories have been serving thousands of users and customers, and providing laboratory services for a diverse set of engineering training, pure and applied research, as well as educational activities for the university and the local industries in Hong Kong. To deliver good quality laboratory services with total user and customer satisfaction was the mission of the laboratories (Chin et al., 1996). In 1994, the Head of the Manufacturing Engineering Department, Professor K.V. Patri, urged the launch of a quality improvement programme, Quality Campaign In Manufacturing Engineering Laboratories (QCIMEL). A results-oriented process approach was adopted to implement this ongoing programme (Patri, 1994). The design and execution of the programme coincided to a considerable extent with the SQMS assessment criteria and requirements. It has seven stages in line with the SQMS 14 steps (as shown in Figure 3) which is described as follows. The establishment stage Step 1: Define corporate values and mission The vision and mission of the organisation has to be translated into goals and strategies which have to be linked with the approach the organisation is using

Self-assessed quality management 621

IJQRM 16,6
Stage VII: Improvement/ Breakthrough

622
Stage VI: Recognition

14. Achieve Performance excellence through self-assessment Quality development Quality maintenance Quality improvement 12. Promote 13. Recognise good practices quality efforts and reinforce with rewards achievement and motivation 11. 10. Standardise improved procedures and practices Measure results and benchmark achievements

Stage V: Audit

equirem

ents

ISO 9000

Stage IV: Execution

Safety R

9. Execute planned actions and recommend positive changes 8. 7. Suggest improvement and breakthrough actions Manage critical processes and performance 6. Deploy and empower staff capabilities

and ISO

Stage III: Investigation Stage II: Promotion

ental and

14000 Sta

Environm

5. Provide training of tools and methods 4. 3.

ndards

Promote quality culture and team-building Develop objectives and identify critical process 2. Establish Steering Committee

Stage I: Establishment

Quality,

Figure 3. Fourteen steps of SQMS implementation

1. Define corporate values and mission

for its self-assessment. The management of the laboratories has set forth a clear mission statement as to ``develop a lively culture towards quality improvement through effort, so that the traditional, hierarchical and top-down ethos of laboratory management could be complemented by a worker-oriented and bottom-up activity'' (Patri, 1994). This allowed all laboratory staff (including academic staff, administrative staff, technicians and labourer), students, suppliers and visitors to visualise the mission, culture and commitments of the laboratories.

Step 2: Establish steering committee A steering committee was formed in the fall of 1994 to design, plan and manage the quality programme. It was composed of a chairman and six senior laboratory staff. The committee members evaluated the current status of the laboratories, determined its strengths and weaknesses, sought opportunities for improvements, prepared quality plans with the divisions and personnel concerned, and provided new motivation for the improvements. They are, for instance, to identify improvement needs at both managerial and shop-floor levels; to obtain agreements between the management and shop-floor staff regarding the scope and objectives of improvement efforts; and to develop an employee-led process for improvement. Step 3: Develop objectives and identify critical processes The steering committee developed quality goals and objectives, and performance improvement guidelines in conjunction with the corporate values and mission. The success elements were investigated and critical processes identified. This covered the design, planning, operations, delivery, maintenance, control and monitoring aspects, as well as the performance audits of the processes, products and services provided by the laboratories. The committee made the general descriptions of the self-assessment criteria more specific to fit their situation and giving them meaning within the context of the operations. It was important for the management, supervisory and other laboratory staff to know which constituent parts require development of documentation and conformity to quality, environmental, and safety management standards. The promotion stage Step 4: Promote quality culture and team-building A series of quality-awareness seminars and experiences-sharing talks were conducted for laboratory staff by both internal trainers and invited external quality professionals from industries. Quality management concepts and team practices (such as bottom-up quality culture, leadership, team building and quality control circles) were conveyed, and technical visits to the leading local companies were arranged. Three work teams and several task forces were formed according to their skills and different operational requirements. Facilitators were assigned by the steering committee to help direct the administration and improvement efforts of individual teams. Step 5: Provide training of tools and methods Team members received sufficient training in applying practical skills, methods and techniques (such as problem solving techniques, quality control tools, 5S concepts and implementation, the use of the new or revised work instructions, reporting techniques and meeting management) in their jobrelated areas. The quality policies in laboratories and the conformity requirements of ISO 9000 and ISO 14000 were included in the training

Self-assessed quality management 623

IJQRM 16,6

624

programmes. Regular safety workshops were arranged to strengthen the team members' knowledge and skills on handling quality and safety problems. In addition to in-house training, team leaders and some supervisory staff were sent for outside assessor and leadership training in order to create expertise and gain experience in the self-assessment process. These staff members formed the critical mass within the organisation to start internal assessor training for other team members. Step 6: Deploy and empower staff capabilities The management have delegated authorities and deployed resources to teams and work forces in conjunction with the execution of improvement tasks and activities. The Steering Committee reviewed the progress of individual teams, advising any amendments to the management for better deployment of resources. Motivation and morale support were initiated from the top, and then put forth the different divisions of the laboratories. Co-ordination and cooperation amongst different functional areas (such as design, operations and maintenance) were encouraged and reinforced. Moreover, it was also found important to empower employees with authority and sufficient resources, in particular allowing supervisory staff and team leaders the necessary time required for the self-assessment activities. The investigation stage Step 7: Manage critical processes and performance With clear guidance and support, all work teams and task forces were encouraged to initiate projects and plans regarding the improvement of processes, operations and procedures in their work places. The core requirements of design quality, prevention, conformance and documentation were emphasised. In order to diagnose the improvement opportunities and analyse problematic areas, information of processes performance were acquired, and relevant standards, specifications, tools and methods were employed. The identified items were prioritised according to the users' and customers' requirements, the time and resource constraints as well as the environmental, safety and hygiene concerns. The process plans of selfassessment were then developed and the adopted methodologies were agreed. The execution stage Step 8: Suggest improvements and breakthrough actions Both improvement and problematic areas were segregated to determine whether the ``Kaizen-type'' of improvements or breakthrough actions or both were applied. There have been a number of positive suggestions on the improvement of work environments (particularly in safety and hygiene) and minimisation of work inefficiency. Detailed action plans were scheduled with the consensus and support from all functional areas concerned. Appropriate procedures were prepared and work instructions revised in line with the users'

feedback and requirements (such as due dates and schedules of laboratory experiments). Step 9: Execute planned actions and recommend positive changes A number of improvement projects of both technical and non-technical nature (for instance, the Users' Lockers Improvement Project, the Road Sign Project, the Laboratory Communication System and the Laboratory Security System) have been implemented successfully in the laboratories. Improvement and corrective actions were carried out and their progress was reviewed. The results addressed team effectiveness, which in turn stimulated team efforts and encouraged feedback in performance improvement. Accompanied with these positive changes, improved processes and guidelines for documentation control (such as the approval, issue, distribution, updating and retrieval of documents) were established. Co-ordination and support from other functional areas and academic staff were also reinforced. The audit stage Step 10: Measure results and benchmark achievements Regular performance assessments and audits were carried out and users' feedback were stressed. Deviations from the predetermined objectives were explained, and achievements were benchmarked against other laboratories within the university and other ``best-in-class'' performances in industry. Improvements of quality efforts were attained through better discipline and organisation of workplace and maintenance of standardised conditions in the laboratories. Continual management reviews of results also enforced the performance improvement effectively. Moreover, self-assessment practices have become regular activities to measure the quality maturity of the laboratories. Step 11: Standardise improved procedures and practices All positive changes and improvements were audited in line with the corporate mission and operational objectives. They were documented, and eventually became new operational and self-assessment processes. The results of selfassessment were used to refine the quality goals, enhance customer values and eliminate customer complaints. Besides, useful data and information were processed and shared among all functions to create organisational learning throughout the laboratories. The recognition stage Step 12: Promote good practices and reinforce achievements Performance improvements encouraged the positive changes in quality culture across the laboratories. Good quality practices were reinforced with emphasis being placed on enhancement of customer value, employee satisfaction, supplier relationship, safety, productivity and operational performances of the laboratories. The self-learning among laboratory staff has been stimulated, and

Self-assessed quality management 625

IJQRM 16,6

the creation and transfer of good practices throughout the laboratories was also facilitated. Step 13: Recognise quality efforts with rewards and motivation Continuous quality efforts were explicitly rewarded. Management appreciation honoured these work teams and individuals for recognition of their efforts in achieving predetermined targets of improvement performance. This stimulated the teams and individuals to perform even better, and also encouraged others to participate actively in the improvement activities. Positive recognition and feedback of quality efforts were important for organisational learning and as stimulus to create structured, planned and continued improvement activities throughout the laboratories. The improvement/breakthrough stage Step 14: Achieve performance excellence through self-assessments The management has recognised the importance of self-assessments and linked the achievements to the related review process and strategic planning for the laboratories. The self-assessment procedures were properly established according to the periodically updated quality manual. The QCIMEL programme has created a motivating environment in which staff members voluntarily applied more discretionary effort and boosted their performance. Eventually, individual teams decided the processes and improvement activities which they committed to, and became the autonomous entities to work upon their own improvement projects and plans. In addition, a committed management role also encouraged total employee involvement and facilitated group efforts on quality development, maintenance and improvement efforts throughout the laboratories. Evaluation of SQMS implementation Several variables and a host of factors (such as organisational resources, commitment of management, state of operations, health of equipment, impact of changes, communication between departments, time spent on training, employee resistance, conflicting interpretation and so on) affected the implementation pace of the quality programme. Its effectiveness was evaluated by the management, taking all these variables and factors into consideration and emphasising customer satisfaction, safety, operational and financial performance. The benefits of QCIMEL implementation have been overwhelmingly positive in the laboratories, especially in encouraging culture change, achieving performance, enhancing safety operations and alleviating the fire-fighting problems (Chin et al., 1996; Pun, 1998). Successful cases of quality and productivity improvements were becoming increasingly numerous and impressive. Staff were actively involved in the ongoing improvement processes. Their attitudes have been changed positively towards quality improvement, their morale and efficiency been improved on shared tasks and team activities. These changes revolved around a cultural shift to total quality

626

management and total employee involvement. Furthermore, new improvement projects (for instance, the WWW-based Inquiry System and the MEL Library System for Purchase Catalogue) were developed, and many suggestions and correction actions were implemented. Defects and non-conformance were reduced at various operation levels from designs and resource planning through installation, to servicing and administration. Self-assessment practices stimulated performance improvement and created a strong link to the business results of MEL. Members of the Steering Committee have recently rated the MEL performance in a range of scores from 700 to 750 out of 1,000 points on the SQMS scale. Considerable high scores were achieved in several areas using the SQMS criteria of Senior Executive Leadership, Human Resource Focus, Process Analysis and Management, Operations and Business Results and Employee Satisfaction. The results encouraged further initiatives for continuous performance improvement and helped the laboratories to re-track its current operations and deliver ever-improving value to users and customers (Pun, 1998). Conclusion With the proliferation of several quality awards and standards, many organisations have taken the initiative to employ different awards and standards in one form or another to sustain competitive edge. The ultimate objective of a self-assessed quality management system is to assist the organisation in its quest for corporate performance, business results and financial health. It can be achieved through proceduralising organisational activities and increasing uniformity and conformity of repeated tasks (van der Wiele et al., 1997). Quality-led organisations should have clear core values and achievable objectives. The management should drive the quality initiatives, and link them to the TQM-oriented assessment criteria and compliance requirements. However, if quality efforts focus primarily on conformity and documentation, there may be separation between quality management and overall business management, reversing a trend toward their better integration. It is therefore best to establish and maintain a total systems approach with strong self-assessment orientation. Otherwise, this may result in fragmentation of efforts, slow response and weak productivity growth within the organisations (Reimann and Hertz, 1993). Self-assessment is more than just another fad, it is a management approach based on a mission to aim for business excellence (Beasley, 1994; van der Wiele et al., 1997). The proposed SQMS codifies the principles of TQM in clear and accessible language, and also provides companies with a comprehensive framework for assessing their progress towards the new paradigm of management and commonly acknowledged goals of customer satisfaction and increased employee involvement. It adopts the evaluation principles and framework compatible to that of MBNQA and has a wider system integrity. The SQMS criteria can be used for self-assessment of a company's performance on an ongoing basis and internal benchmarking of business results. Their uses

Self-assessed quality management 627

IJQRM 16,6

628

can also be extended for external comparisons with other organisations. The system provides a useful framework for addressing the establishment and maintenance of TQM-oriented mission, objectives and targets that state a commitment to a specified level of performance, an integrated planning process and strategy for meeting this stated performance commitment, and a participative organisational structure for executing the strategy. Moreover, it also helps develop the results-oriented implementation programmes and related support tools to assist in meeting these stated objectives, provide the communications and training programmes to execute the policy commitment, and make effective use of customer-focused measurement and review processes to monitor progress. Organisations seeking performance improvements are encouraged to foster their conformity efforts with the feasible SQMS framework that integrates the MBNQA criteria and the ISO 19001 and ISO 14001 requirements. The QCIMEL programme in an engineering organisation has demonstrated a successful implementation case using the SQMS criteria for performance excellence. How to integrate the functions and evaluate the business performances would still need to be determined by individual organisations according to their selfassessment needs. Nevertheless, the SQMS framework has potential to be tailored to suit different business and industrial settings and satisfy the varied organisational structure and management style as well as the economic, social and cultural practices of employees.
References Affisco, J.F., Nasri, F. and Javad Paknejad, M. (1997), ``Environmental versus quality standards an overview and comparison'', International Journal of Quality Science, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 5-23. BSI (1994), Quality Systems (BS EN ISO 9001:1994), British Standard Institute, London. Beasley, K. (1994), Self-Assessment: A Tool for Integrated Management, Stanley Thornes Publishers, Cheltenham. Beechner, A.B. and Koch, J.E. (1997), ``Integrating ISO 19001 and ISO 14001'', Quality Progress, February, pp. 33-6. Brown, M.G. (1996), Baldrige Award Winning Quality, Quality Resources/ASQC Press, Milwaukee, WI. Cascio, J. (1996) (ed), The ISO 14000 Handbook, CEEM Information Services/ASQ Quality Press, Fairfax, VA. Chin, K.S., Patri, K.V., Pun, K.F., Yeung, W.H., Poon, L.T. and Poon, K.K. (1996), ``Starting the journey: a team-based QI in a university laboratory'', The TQM Magazine, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 20-5. Chin, K.S., Yam, C.M. and Pun, K.F. (1995), ``Continuous quality improvement beyond ISO 9000'', Total Quality Review, Vol. 5 No. 1, March/April, pp. 53-9. Dale, B.G. (1994), Managing Quality, 2nd ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. EFQM (1997), Self-Assessment 1997 Guidelines for Companies, European Foundation for Quality Management, Brussels. Florida, R. (1996), ``Lean and green: the move to environmentally conscious manufacturing'', California Management Review, Vol. 39 No. 1, Fall, pp. 80-105. Hale, G. (1997), ``ISO 14000 integration tips'', Quality Digest, February, pp. 39-43.

ISO (1994a), EN/ISO 9000-1 Quality Management and Quality Assurance Standards Part 1: Guidelines for selection and use, International Organisation for Standardisation, June. ISO (1994b), EN/ISO 9001 Quality Systems Model for Quality Assurance in Design, Development, Production, Installation and Servicing, International Organisation for Standardisation, June. ISO (1996a), EN/ISO 14001 Environmental Management Systems Specification with Guidance for Use, International Organisation for Standardisation, June. ISO (1996b), EN/ISO 14004 Environmental Management Systems General Guidelines on Principles, Systems and supporting Techniques, International Organisation for Standardisation, June. ISO (1996c), EN/ISO 14010 Guidelines for Environmental Auditing General Principles, International Organisation for Standardisation, June. ISO (1996d), EN/ISO 14011 Guidelines for Environmental Auditing Audit Procedures, Auditing of Environment Management Systems, International Organisation for Standardisation, June. ISO (1996e), EN/ISO 14012 Guidelines for Environmental Auditing Qualification Criteria for Environmental Auditors, International Organisation for Standardisation, June. ISO (1998), ISO/TC/SC 2N 415 9001: 2000 Quality Management Systems Requirements, (Draft Version), International Organisation for Standardisation, July. Kuhre, W.L. (1995), ISO 14001 Certification: Environmental Management Systems, PrenticeHall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Mahoney, F.X. and Thor, C.G. (1994), The TQM Trilogy, AMACOM, New York. McCully, A.D. (1997a), ``Why you should integrate ISO 9000 and ISO 14000 systems'', Quality Digest, March, pp. 24-9. McCully, A.D. (1997b), ``Integration and legal impacts of EMS documentation'', Quality Digest, May, pp. 49-54. NIST (1998), Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Criteria, National Institute of Standards and Technology, US Department of Commerce, Washington, DC. Patri, K.V. (1994), Quality Campaign in Manufacturing Laboratories An Internal Document, Department of Manufacturing Engineering, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong. Pun, K.F. (1998), ``Implementing an integrated quality management system'', Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Quality Congress, Philadephia, PA, May, pp. 356-62. Reimann, C.W. and Hertz, H.S. (1993), ``The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award and ISO9000 Registration'', ASTM Standardisation News, November. Rondinelli, D.A. and Vastag, G. (1996), ``International environmentally standards and corporate policies: an integrative framework'', California Management Review, Vol. 39 No. 1, Fall, pp. 106-22. Struebing, L. (1996), ``9000 Standards?'', Quality Progress, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 23-28. Tummala, V.M. and Tang, C.L. (1994), ``Strategic quality management, Malcolm Baldrige and European Quality Awards and ISO 9000 Certification: core concepts and comparative analysis'', Annual Journal of IIE (HK), Hong Kong, December, pp. 40-55. Wever, C.T. (1996), Strategic Environmental Management Using TQEM and ISO 14000 for Competitive Advantage, John Wiley, New York, NY. van der Wiele, A., Dale, B.G. and Williams, A.R.T. (1997), ``ISO 9000 series registration to total quality management: the transformation journey'', International Journal of Quality Science, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 236-52.

Self-assessed quality management 629