Editorial

Citation

Radnor, Z. and Heap, J. (2008), "Editorial", International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 57 No. 8. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijppm.2008.07957haa.001

Editorial

Article Type: Editorial From: International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Volume 57, Issue 8

Your editors continue to work in the field – so that, amongst other things (like earning a crust), we can continue to set new knowledge in the context of “real” situations and possibilities. Just finishing a field study on the Indonesian fishing industry, it is clear that words like “quality” and “value” have both generic and specific meanings depending on the context.

Someone buying a can of tuna from an English supermarket is judging that tuna quite differently from a buyer trying to establish if fresh tuna air-freighted from Indonesia to Japan is really sushimi grade.

Both want a “quality” product; both want value for money but the quality processes that go into ensuring the delivery of sushimi grade tuna are different – and, ironically, simpler since such tuna must be delivered within 30 hours of it being caught.

This issue explores issues of quality – and of the processes that go to create it … along with those that go to create it efficiently.

The first paper by Lin and Jang reflects on the implementation of a quality “award” – ISO 9000 – sought after by organizations throughout the world in order to show that they have in place quality processes which therefore produce quality products and services. On achievement of the award organizations can display a “kite mark” as a sign of quality. Over the years many writings have criticized the award as a “tick box” exercise where organizations do what they need to do in order to achieve the award which may not mean that they produce quality. Also, another criticism is that as the award is achieved through an auditing process the organization “plays the game” to achieve it at the time of the audit. The paper presented in this issue, however, based on businesses within Taiwan indicates a positive relationship between ISO 9000 and business performance. It uses structural modeling based around the constructs of quality planning, employee involvement, continuous improvement and top management support to support its claim.

A tool used in many of the quality approaches is “process mapping”. Process mapping allows a picture of the process to be presented which can then highlight any issues such as duplication of activity, waiting time, lack of information, etc. … Processes develop over time and as such “waste” or “non value adding activity” can creep in. Reviewing the process through tools such as process mapping allows the process to be revised, streamlined and become more efficient. The next paper in this issue by Klotz, Horman, Bi and Bechtel seeks to understand the impact that process mapping can have on formalizing, communicating and so making the process transparent. Through a measurable definition of transparency the paper indicates that through process mapping this increased from 5 percent to 27 percent. As so many quality and improvement methodologies use this approach a paper such as this is useful to open debates on the effectiveness of such tools.

Lean, another improvement methodology, is often thought of as an efficiency movement – and indeed it is. Yet, some would argue that its roots are in quality … the kind of quality that arises from systematic, consistent reflection of the processing system. Alongside Lean also sits the concept of Six Sigma – which again is about delivering consistent, unvarying results from streamlined processes … though “Six Sigma” takes a more statistical approach by not counting the defects in processes, but the number of opportunities within a process that could result in defects. Over the past few years Lean – at last – seems to have risen above its manufacturing heartland and is finally being used as a generic approach across a range of important sectors including the public sector. The advantage of this is not that those sectors benefit – although of course they do. The advantage is that the vocabulary and concepts of lean will start to be translated and extended making it a more powerful, more widely-applicable concept.

The final research paper by Doolen et al. focuses on one of the main tools used with the Lean approach – kaizen events. Kaizen is a Japanese term meaning “continuous improvement”. A kaizen event is normally held over three to five days focusing on recording and evaluating the process, developing and redesigning a new process and implementing and reviewing some results from the event. The paper describes an assessment methodology which can be used to evaluate the impact and effect of a kaizen event. The paper “tests” the approach and reports that events have varying success depending on senior management support particularly after the event. The paper particularly focuses on the impact related to the human resource outcomes which it claims to date have been overlooked in many writings.

The final paper, a reflective practice piece, by Kumar et al. illustrates how the application of Six Sigma can improve a financial process. The use of Six Sigma reduced the time and improved the throughput which the paper argues reflects the usefulness of tools such as Six Sigma in financial services. It also notes, as have other papers in this issue, the importance of senior management/executive “buy-in” in supporting the change and improvement process.

So, there we are – another issue delivered to our readers... and an issue that hopefully moves forward understanding of those interlocking concepts of Quality, Lean and Six Sigma. The real power – in terms of transforming organizational performance – comes when such approaches and techniques are addressed and applied as an integrated whole rather than in piecemeal and scattergun approach focusing on only a few tools … which can result in the results being sub-optimal. We hope that this issue has moved such an integrated approach forward one or two more notches.

Zoe Radnor, John Heap