Read Microsoft Word - 2 Janes Dolinsek.doc text version

Aleksander Janes University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper, Koper, Slovenija Slavko Dolinsek University of Ljubljana, Institute for Innovation and Development, Ljubljana University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Ljubljana University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper, Koper, Slovenija

IS THE EXCELLENCE MODEL AN ANSWER TO GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS?

ABSTRACT The Port of Koper was established in 1957. From the small local port they developed into the significant European Logistics and Distribution Centre Luka Koper, d.d. Luka Koper, d.d. of today is exceedingly successful and rapidly developing company, which is founded on their adopted values: knowledge, enterprise, partnership, responsibility and respect. The company was recognized for Excellence (R4E) in 2005 and finalist in 2006 European Excellence Award (EEA) process. As we can see from the literature review, case studies and research experiences, if the companies wish to remain competitive in this globally strengthening world, they must increase awareness and exploitation of their key business processes. For that reason a holistic approach, like implementation of the EFQM model, is the challenge to support development of the Integrated Management System (IMS) in order to encourage nourishment of adopted values, innovation, productivity and environment preservation. Purpose of this research is to analyze the benefits of the EFQM model implementation in the Luka Koper, d.d., and, to display the importance of the processes key performance indicators (KPI s') influence on the business results of the company. Key words: self-assessment, national quality award, PRSPO, EEA finalist, improvements, EFQM model JEL classification: M140, M420

1. INTRODUCTION The Port of Koper was established in 1957 and celebrated 50th anniversary in 2007. Since then they developed into the significant port and logistic system in the Adriatic maritime market. Luka Koper, d.d. was the winner of the Slovenian national quality award (PRSPO) in 2002. The company was also recognized for Excellence (R4E) in 2005 and finalist in the 2006 European Excellence Award (EEA) process. 1

With the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) model integration in management system, the company develops a holistic measurement system, continuous improvements, self-assessment, benchmarking, inter-organizational learning and good practice transfer. EFQM model is usually implemented within the pilot project approach. Most frequent purpose for such approach is bound to participation in a national quality award (NQA) process. Through the self-assessment process, company ascertains the improvement opportunities which are in this manner subject to "competition rules". But this is not the most appropriate combination because self-assessment, by its nature, is not intended to be the subject to "competition rules" in a NQA process. EFQM model, when used in practice, shows that is difficult to determine transparent relations of enablers (causes) with business results (effects). Connecting approaches are undefined (Babic, 2007) and the problem lies in the structure of the EFQM model (Conti, 2007). However, the implemented model doesn't enable the identification of all information on the connections (correlations) between process Key Performance Indicators (KPI's) and the results. In this context the company doesn't have a transparent evaluation of resource inputs in efficiency of the implemented EFQM model in the management system. Diagnostic activities, in this context, are usually "too expensive" to the company and it's usually overworked employees. Because of the latter's outlook, diagnostic is regarded as being time-consuming activity. With the development of a model for identification of the influential processes KPIs' which gives important contribution to the KPR, company can perform its own diagnostic activities and focus on improvements of the key processes and consecutively on the results in a short and medium-time period. Analysis of documents and records, semi-structured questionnaires and processes KPI's values indicates the latter's significant influence on the business KPRs'. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of many researches about excellence model implementation, performed all over the world i.e. Australia, China, EU, New Zealand and USA, indicates the general favorable influence of the KPI's on the KPR's of the organizations (Hausner and Vogel, 1999; Hendricks and Singhal, 2000; PWHC, 2000; Eriksson and Hansson, 2003; Mann and Grigg, 2006; Miyagawa and Yoshida, 2005; Boulter et al. 2005).

2. BUSINESS EXCELLENCE MODEL LITERATURE REVIEW EFQM model was developed at the beginning of ninety's of twentieth century, and introduced to the public at EFQM Forum 1991 in Paris. First European Quality Award, actual EFQM Excellence Award (EEA), was handed over in 1992 (Conti, 2007). Slovenian first pilot project of National Quality Award (PRSPO) was accomplished in 1996, and first PRSPO was handed over in 1998 (Pavlin, 2007). EFQM model is founded on the self-assessment likewise other excellence models around the world i.e. Malcolm Baldrige NQA (MBNQA) in USA, British Quality Foundation (BQF) in 2

United Kingdom, Deming Prize (DP) in Japan, Australian Business Awards (ABA) in Australia or Canadian Framework for Business Excellence (CFBE) (BQF, 2007; Leonard and McAdam, 2002; Bou-Llusar et al. 2003; Boys et al. 2005). Selfassessment contains regular activity review and identification of active inertia on every area of organization's activity (Karapetrovic and Wilborn, 2002; Savic 2007) over not obligatory nine criteria (Conti, 1998; MIRS, 2004). EFQM model criteria are consisted of 32 sub-criteria and the latter of 191 guidance points (Figure 1). Figure 1: Model EFQM (European Foundation for Quality Management)

Enablers 3. People 7. People Results Results

1. Leadership

2. Policy & Strategy

5. Processes

6. Customer Results

9. Key Performance Results

4. Partnerships & Resources

8. Society Results

Innovation and learning

Source: Dolinsek et al. 2006, MIRS 2008, ® EFQM 2008

First five criteria represent enablers and the last four criteria represent results of the organization. Enablers tell what organization is doing; meanwhile results indicate what organization achieves. In such a manner results are the consequence of enablers and enablers are improved on the feedback information's basis from the results. Model enables many approaches for the excellence achievement in all viewpoints of organization activities. Excellent results at key performance, customers, people and society are achieved with leadership which is the driving force of policy and strategy, people, partnerships and resources. Connections in the Figure 1 are indicating dynamic nature of the model (Dolinsek et al. 2006; EFQM, 2008). Self-assessment should be triggered from the management board when company defines key strategic objectives. Triggering should be ended with the list of objectives which have the highest priority. At the same time the objectives list and priority tasks form the framework of the self-assessment process (Conti, 1998). EFQM model is applicable also at definition of the Total Quality Management (TQM) philosophy. In that way represents a help at fostering TQM from the part of the management board (Van der Wiele et al. 1996; Mangelsdorf, 1999; van der Wiele et al. 2000; Bou-Llusar et al. 2003; Eriksson and Garvare, 2005). American research about effective implementation of the management paradigm-TQM and its impact on the financial results of 600 quality award winners, showed, that all of 3

them achieved significant improvement in stock returns, operating income, sales, total assets, employees, return on sales and return on assets (Hendricks and Singhal, 2000; MIRS, 2004). In Europe, EFQM and BQF organizations sponsored the research for the identification of correlations between adopted principles of the EFQM model and improved business results. Research showed business performance improvement on a short and long-term for the companies which effectively implemented the principles of the EFQM model (Boulter et al. 2005). Results of PriceWaterHouseCoopers research on the sample of 3500 public sector organizations in the UK indicated that the tool for continuous improvements is the EFQM model in 56% (PWHC, 2000). Research, in the EU northern region, conducted by Kristensen, Juhl and Eskildsen showed that Danish companies, who applied Danish Business Excellence Index are achieving significantly better results than other companies (Kristensen et al. 2001). Sweden Institute for Quality performed equal research for the Swedish companies which showed similar results (Eriksson and Hansson, 2003). Likewise the results of researches in Australia, New Zealand and China confirmed positive effects of systematic application of the excellence model (Hausner and Vogel, 1999; Mann and Grigg, 2006; Miyagawa and Yoshida, 2005). Excellence model influences on the companies' results is relatively researched in EU and wider, meanwhile in Slovenia this kind of researches are rare. Winning the Slovenian PRSPO means to get the highest national quality award of the Republic of Slovenia, which basis on the EFQM model. Research about registered competitors in the frame of Slovenian PRSPO and comparative data from the EEA showed that main motives and benefits of the EFQM model application in the EEA frame are self-assessment, benchmarking, employee engagement and feedback information's. Meanwhile the Slovenian PRSPO competitors emphasized excellence as a part of the strategy, continuous improvements and good practice exchange (Kern Pipan, 2007). Adaptation of the EFQM model to the company and its capabilities (Piskar and Dolinsek, 2006; Conti, 2007; Savic, 2007; Kovac and Kern Pipan, 2005), with regularly usage of the self-assessment (van der Wiele et al. 1996; Samuelsson and Nilsson, 2001; Skubic and Kern Pipan, 2005; Kern Pipan, 2007) is essential for the successful companies. Prestigious award winner's cases all over the world are confirming that organizations with the systematic use of tools for continuous improvements are achieving lasting operational excellence. In Slovenia we have, after more than a decade of the PRSPO existence, cases of excellent companies which achieved exceptional success also on the European level and placement among the EEA finalists. This are: Hermes Softlab, d.d., in 1998, Luka Koper d.d. in 2006, and Trimo Trebnje d.d. in 2007. 4

In the last 17 years EFQM model showed validity in excellence recognition, as an informal assessment standard and benchmarking tool (Conti, 2007).

3. RESEARCH PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES In spite of numerous studies and researches about implementation of the EFQM excellence model, the approaches for determination of transparent relations between enablers and results are still difficult to scan (Babic, 2007) and consider's the structure of the excellence model EFQM. According to T. Conti (1998) and T.A. Conti (2007) this should be the subject for further research. Likewise at the Luka Koper, d.d., they miss greater connectedness between KPIs' and strategic directions. Large emphasis is given on financial data and too extensive surveying of the data which are easier to measure and are likely less important. In this context we cannot avoid the cost of total quality management of the company. Comparison of benefits in form of approach improvements, better market and financial results and investments in quality tells us what kind of economy of the quality management company has (Babic, 2007). In our research, case study of the Luka Koper d.d., company is discussed, which has carried out its first self-assessment in the 1999, and was the winner of the Slovenian PRSPO in 2002. The company was also the EEA finalist in 2006. Main purpose of the research was to establish if it is possible to put up an adequate model for identification of the processes KPIs' which have significant influence on the business results and objectives respectively. Based on problem identification and purpose of the research, following specific objectives were defined: 1. Determination of the groups of processes KPIs' and groups of results. 2. Determination of the cause-effect relations between processes KPIs' and results. 3. Identification of the influential processes KPIs' which gives important contribution to the key performance results of the company. 4. Setting up the model for identification of the KPI's in correlation with the results of the internationally recognized excellent organization.

4. METHODOLOGY The paradigmatic orientation of this research is quantitative, because the influence of the process KPIs' on the company's business results is discussed. As a research method was chosen case study (Yin, 1994; Gummesson, 2000; Ivanko, 2007) based on the following criteria: Self-assessments are performed regularly since 1999, Participation in PRSPO competitions (PRSPO winners in 2002) and EEA competitions participations (R4E in 2005 and Finalist in 2006). Selected criteria are based on facts. First fact of all is that self-assessments by EFQM model are performed regularly since 1999. Second fact is participation in PRSPO competition process for three times which was also a condition for the EEA participation. And the third fact is participation in EEA competition which reflects 5

maturity of the company's management system and a request for feedback information from the EFQM independent assessors. Documents and records were studied closely and included analysis of public available data from company's application reports for PRSPO and EEA competition, web sites and annual reports. Observations were performed during research which is still being continued. Employees who participated into the interviews were mainly from the middle management level and some experts. They were also members of the EEA 2009 project team. Reason for interviewing the selected sample of employee's is in the acknowledgment of EFQM model and its terminology (Yin, 1994: 78-80; Eriksson and Garvare, 2005: 899; Janes and Faganel, 2008: 12). Semi-structured interview questionnaire was based on public data available from the EEA 2006 application report and divided into nine sections in accordance with the nine criteria of the EFQM model. Some questions were open and some questions consisted of five point scale from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent). In all sections of the questionnaire the interviewees could express their comments. Answers were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively with the factor analysis method. Interviews were performed in May and June 2008.

5. EMPIRICAL FINDINGS The Port of Koper was established in 1957 and celebrated 50th anniversary in 2007. Actual name of the company was gained in 1961. Railway to Koper, which was one of the key factors of the rapid port development, was built in 1967. In that manner was established the first regular container line for the Mediterranean. From the small company they developed into the significant European Logistics and Distribution Centre Luka Koper, d.d., in the Adriatic and European maritime market (Luka Koper 2006a). Milestones in the development of the company's IMS were performed as follows: · · · · · · · · · · · · 1994: Beginning of implementation of the quality principles. 1997: Certificate by ISO 9002 standard is received. 1998: Supervisory Board resolution about management system harmonization with principles of EFQM model is accepted. 1999: First self-assessment by EFQM model is performed. 2000: Certificate by ISO 14001 standard is received. 2002: National Quality Award is received. 2003: Certificate by ISO 9001:2000 is received. 2004: HACCP system and certificate NON GMO by BRC in the coal and iron ore terminal is implemented. 2005: Recognition for Excellence (R4E) at EEA is achieved. 2006: Finalist placement in the EEA is accomplished. 2007: Certificate by ISO 22000:2005 is received. 2008: Certificate by BS OHSAS 18001 is received (Luka Koper 2007; Luka Koper 2008, 2008a).

6

Luka Koper, d.d. is exceedingly successful and rapidly developing company, which is founded on their adopted values: knowledge, enterprise, partnership, responsibility and respect. Guided by these values they are accomplishing mission, vision and objectives through the planned strategies. The development of the company is based on the implementation of a policy which is defined by the strategic directives: (1) recognized performer of the logistic services, (2) efficient port system and distribution centre, (3) effective long-term business system and (4) care for permanent development. With the support of their adopted values they accomplish strategic directives on the key business areas such as: (1) marketing and offer development, (2) organization and human resources management, (3) infrastructural and technological development, (4) financial assets management and social responsibility. On the key business areas, within defined business processes, could be identified the processes KPI's which significantly influence the key performance results (Table 1). The latter were represented in the company's application reports for PRSPO and EEA competition and were analyzed within the equivalent parts of the semi-structured interview questionnaire. 5.1. Cause and effect relationships among EFQM criteria Qualitative analysis was performed with the comparative method between EFQM model, EEA 2006 application report, answered questionnaires and observations (Gummesson, 2000). Qualitative analysis first statement considers relationships between the criteria and subcriteria. Relations, who are demonstrated through the management system harmonization, are in accordance with the EFQM model. Identified relations belong in the context which is recognized by the EFQM assessors and could be found in the sources like MIRS (2006) and EFQM (2008). These relations between the criteria were identified as represented in Table 1. Relations are evident and on that basis we could get to a conclusion of the company's good management system. Some of the relations are obvious and are to be found in many organizations who implemented the EFQM model, but always organizations have some relations that are unique to them (MIRS 2006). Namely, organizations usually adapt the EFQM model to their business system characteristics and capabilities (Kovac and Kern Pipan, 2005; Piskar and Dolinsek, 2006a; Conti, 1997; Conti, 2007; Savic, 2007). Second statement is that improvement opportunities are identified on all performance areas. Projects resulting from the (self) assessment findings are reestablished and active (i.e. land terminals, development of the railway cargo transport). Improvement actions influence is impacting many of the sub-criterions which could be monitored with the read threads1. That shows the complexity of the relations between them and should be an issue for further research. Beside the company, red threads are the area of interest

1

Red Threads are themes which represents linkages through the EFQM model. List of themes is changeable and differs between the organizations.

7

also for the external assessors which consider demonstrated relations expressed in the PRSPO or EEA application reports. Table 1: Cause and effect relations EFQM Criteria (Questionnaire Section) 1. Leadership 2. Policy & Strategy 3. People 4. Partnerships & Resources 5. Processes 6. Customer Results 7. People Results 8. Society Results 9. Key Performance Results

Source: Own research

Relationship with criteria and/or sub-criteria 2., 3., 4., 5. 3., 5., 6.a, 7., 8., 9. 1.b, 3.a, 3.b, 3.c, 3.d, 5.a, 7.a. 2.b, 3.b, 3.e, 4.c, 4.d, 4.e, 8., 9. 2.a, 3.c, 3.e, 4.a, 5.e, 6.a, 7., 8.b, 9.a. 9.a. 3. 2.a, 8.a, 8.b. 9.a, 9.b.

Third statement about criteria relations is that during the research, EFQM model complexity comprehension wasn't on the very high level. This could be the consequence of the company's rapid international expansion at that time. The fact is that Slovenia became "too small" for the Luka Koper, d.d. Regarding to that, employees have less time at disposal for systematic and deeper acknowledgment with the EFQM model complex relations. This statement could be tied to research of Eriksson and Garvare (2005: 901-909) and Janes and Faganel (2008: 13) who all allege similar difficulties: overworked employees, requirement of a great deal of resources and time pretentious activities. Questionnaires were returned and analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively with the Factor Analysis method in the SPSS 15.0 for Windows standard statistical software. On the basis of comparative method findings we achieved the first research objective: determination of the groups of processes KPIs' and groups of results as well as the second objective which was the determination of cause and effect relations between processes KPIs' and results (see Table 1). 5.2. Discussion on the basis of the Factor Analysis Findings of the semi-structured interviews quantitative analysis are represented according the EFQM model criteria sections in the Table 2. First statement based on the KMO statistics is that the most part of the used data were under relatively great influence of the specific factors. Namely some of the questions with scale remained unanswered. Lacking data influence is probably reflected in the factor analysis solution.

8

Second statement is that most of the considered variables are good indicators because their communalities were greater than 0,5 (42 of 67 considered variables). And the third statement about explained variance percentage is that selected factor models were relatively good because eight out of nine criteria explains the variance with more than 60 %. Table 2: Factor analysis solution Criteria Factor Variance Cronbach' N Cumulative s Alpha % 59,25 0,62 8

1. Leadership

2. Policy & Strategy

3. People

4. Partnerships & Resources

5. Processes 6. Customer Results 7. People Results

8. Society Results

9. Key Performance Results

F1.1 transfer of leadership enablers on employees effectiveness, F1.2 leaders qualification effectiveness F2.1 strategies and key processes effectiveness, F2.2 organization strategies deployment effectiveness F3.1 employee involvement effectiveness, F3.2 qualification and education effectiveness F4.1 consciousness about technologies and suppliers operation effectiveness, F4.1 consciousness about importance of information of changes and technological processes effectiveness F5 processes development approach effectiveness F6.1 customer relationships management effectiveness, F6.2 service segments effectiveness F7.1 employee empowerment effectiveness F7.2 good practices deployment effectiveness F8.1 collaboration with society effectiveness, F8.2 market and media promotion effectiveness F9.1 process effectiveness, F9.2 policy and strategy effectiveness

67,35

0,61

7

70,54

0,73

8

74,18

0,62

9

60,72 67,25

0,84 0,27

6 5

74,22

0,80

7

77,21

0,52

7

71,83

0,72

7

Source: Own research

9

Factor loadings evaluations, Eigen values, Scree Plots and criteria contents lead us to a two factor model solution for criteria: 1. Leadership, 2. Policy & Strategy, 3. People, 4. Partnerships & Resources, 6. Customer Results, 7. People Results, 8. Society Results and 9. Key Performance Results. Factors loadings were evaluated with the Maximum Likelihood or Principal Axis Factoring method with the Varimax rotation. One factor solution was achieved with the Principal Axis Factoring method which was the case of criterion 5. Processes. In the Table 2 are represented latent factors from the factor analysis solution. Main picture consisted from the solution is the confirmation of the successful business model harmonization with the EFQM model principles. This supports the achievement of the second objective of the research: cause-effect relations between processes KPIs' and results. Factors from the solution confirmed the results that were demonstrated in the EEA application report, annual reports and web site of the company. 5.3 Identification of the influential processes KPIs' From the selected KPIs' (Luka Koper, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008a) is evident exceedingly rapid growth in maritime throughput since 2005 (i.e. from 13,07 mio tons in 2005 to 15,4 mio tons in 2007) which represents the main operation processes of the company. This rapid growth in maritime throughput is reflected also in operating revenues and costs, EBITDA, net profit, added value, staff employment and dividends per share. Table 3: Luka Koper, d.d. KPIs' analysis KPIs' Containers General cargoes Vehicles Liquid cargoe Dry bulk cargoes Net earnings per share Dividend per share Operating revenues Net profit Operating costs EBITDA Added value Employees EFQM Criteria 9.a 9.a 9.a 9.a 9.a 9.a 9.a 9.a 9.a 9.b 9.b 9.b 3.e MU TEU ton Units ton ton EPS EUR thousand EUR thousand EUR thousand EUR thousand EUR thousand EUR People

Source: Annual reports (Luka Koper 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008a)

At this point is worth to mention that the management system harmonization within the EFQM model implementation is definitely encouraged with the use of regularly performed self-assessments since 1999. Results of the performed (self) assessments are

10

used for identification of the improvements projects, preventive and correction measures and innovation and learning on the all key business areas. Self-assessments are being deployed also on the dependent companies of the Luka Koper Group. With the identification of the influential KPIs', based on documents and records review, interviews and strategic directives, we achieved the third research objective.

6. CONCLUSION With the increasing complexity of the business environment, companies focuses more and more on managing the processes and employees who are involved with them. As we can see from the literature review, case studies and research experiences if the companies wish to remain competitive in this globally strengthening world, and improve their management system, they must increase awareness and exploitation of their key business processes. For that reason a holistic approach, i.e. EFQM model, is the challenge to support development of the Integrated Management System (IMS) in order to encourage nourishment of adopted values, innovation, productivity, preservation of the environment and commitment to excellence. While fostering exploitation of the resources and business processes, companies frequently integrate standards and models (i.e. ISO 9001, ISO 14001, ISO 22000, BS OHSAS 18001 and EFQM) into their management system. In the case of Luka Koper, d.d. IMS, standards and models enables basis for identification and implementation of the strategic projects like: managing land terminals which are linking Koper Bay with Central and Eastern Europe, boosting the volume of quality cargoes by introducing new capacities, becoming the driving force of development in railway cargo transport, contributing to the development of the passenger port in Koper; and providing sea protection in the whole of the Slovenian sea. Case of the company which is regularly and systematically accomplishing the Supervisory Board resolution about business management system harmonization with principles of the EFQM model is very rare in Slovenia. From the literature review we didn't found any similar case study research. Many excellence model researches indicate the general favorable influence of the EFQM model implementation (Hausner and Vogel, 1999; Hendricks and Singhal, 2000; PWHC, 2000; Eriksson and Hansson, 2003; Mann and Grigg, 2006; Miyagawa and Yoshida, 2005; Boulter et al. 2005). Regarding to the ascertainments of the factor analysis above, we identified 17 latent factors which we could labeled and represented in Table 2. Labeled factors represent the confirmation of the successful business model harmonization. In this paper we represented only a part of our findings because the research is still being performed. From the actual analysis of the research we could ascertain that EFQM model implementation is fostering and changing company's organizational culture. Analysis of documents, records and processes KPI's values indicates their significant influence on the KPRs'. On the basis of comparative method findings we achieved the first research objective which was determination of the groups of processes KPIs' and groups of results as well as the second objective which was the determination of cause and effect relations (Table 1) between processes KPIs' 11

and results. With the identification of the influential processes KPIs' of the company we also achieved the third research objective. This case study has some limitations too. First of all findings cannot be generalized at the national level, because of the only one case study (Yin, 1994; Gummeson, 2000). Second limitation is the fact that, in the context of this paper, we were limited to use only public available data. Another limitation is the fact that this research is being performed only for the Slovenian port and logistic system. Benchmarking and assessment between different case studies, on the international level, should be an issue for further research. On that basis we are further studying the importance of diagnose and evaluation of the IMS. The diagnostic activities are usually "too expensive" to the company and it's usually overworked employees. Because of the latter's outlook, diagnostic is regarded as being time-consuming activity. With the development of a model for identification of the influential processes KPIs', company can perform its own diagnostic activities and focus on improvements of the key business processes and consecutively on the results in a short and medium-time period.

REFERENCES

Babic, Marjan. (2007), Odlicnost ne pozna meja. Zbornik referatov 19. Mednarodnega foruma odlicnosti in mojstrstva Otocec 2007 / EFQM konferenca zmagovalcev, Sozitje razlicnih poti odlicnosti in iskanje skupnega imenovalca globalne (univerzalne) odlicnosti, 24. in 25. maj 2007, Novo mesto: Drustvo ekonomistov Dolenjske in Bele krajine. Bou-Llusar, C.J., Escrig-Tena, A.B., Roca-Puig, V., and Beltran-Martin, I. (2003), »To what extent do enablers explain results in the EFQM excellence model?«, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 22(4), 337-353. Boulter, L., Bendell, T., Abas, H., Dahlgaard, J., in Singhal, V. (2005), Report on EFQM and BQF funded Study into The impact of the effective Implementation of rganisational Excellence strategies on key Performance results, http://www.mirs.gov.si/fileadmin/um.gov.si/pageuploads/Dokpdf/PRSPO/ EFQMFinalReport.pdf (15.7.2007). Boys, K., Willcock, A., Karapetrovic. S., in Aung, M. (2005), Evolution towards excellence: use of BE programs by Canadian organizations, Measuring Business Excellence, 9(4), 4-25. BQF. (2007). http://www.quality-foundation.co.uk/pdf/BQFhistory.pdf (10.08.2007). Conti, T. (2007), A history and review of the European Quality Award Model, The TQM Magazine, 19(2), 112-128. Conti, T. (1998), Samoocenjevanje druzb, DZS, d.d., Ljubljana. Conti, Tito A. (2007), A history and review of the European Quality Award Model, The TQM Magazine ,19(2), 112-128. Crosby, P.B. (1989), Kakovost je zastonj, CGP Delo, Ljubljana. Dolinsek, Slavko, Piskar, Franka, Faganel, Armand, Kern Pipan, Karmen and Podobnik, Drago. (2006), Management kakovosti, Koper: Fakulteta za management. EFQM. (2007), http: //excellenceone.efqm.org /Default.aspx?tabid=463 (15.7.2007). EFQM. (2008), Portal, http://excellenceone.efqm.org/Default.aspx?tabid=463 (3.2.2008). Eriksson, Henrik and Hansson, Jonas. (2003), The impact of TQM on financial performance, Measuring business excellence, 7(1), 36-50. Eriksson, Henrik and Garvare, Rickard. (2005), Organisational performance improvement through quality award process participation, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 22 (9), 894912. Gummesson, Evert. (2000), Qualitative Methods in Management Research, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.

12

Hausner, A. and Vogel N. (1999), Linking Botomline Improvements with the Australian Business Excellence Framework, The 1999 Australian Quality Council, Wollongong: University of Wollongong. Hendricks, Kevin B. and Singhal, Vinod R. (B.l.), The Impact of Total Quality Management (TQM) on Financial Performance: Evidence from Quality Award Winners 2000, http ://www.efqm.org /uploads /excellence/ vinod%20full%20report.pdf (15.7.2007). Ivanko, Stefan. (2007), Raziskovanje in pisanje del: Metodologija in tehnologija rayiskovanja ter pisanja strokovnih in znanstvenih del, Ljubljana: Cubus image d.o.o. Janes, Aleksander and Faganel, Armand. (2008). Zadovoljstvo udelezencev projekta poslovne odlicnosti v PS Mercator, d.d., Projektna mreza Slovenije, 11(1), 9­17. Karapetrovic, Stanislav and Walter Wilborn. (2002), Self-audit of process performance, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 19(1), 24-45. Kern Pipan, Karmen. (2007), Management stalnih izboljsav in modeli odlicnost (EFQM, CAF) : samoocenjevanje organizacij - pot napredka, HRM 5(17), 68-73. Kovac, P. and Kern Pipan, K. (2005), Celovito izboljsevanje javne uprave z integracijo razlicnih pristopov na temelju modela odlicnosti EFQM, Zbornik prispevkov: Sodobna javna uprava. Portoroz: Ministrstvo za javno upravo. Kristensen, Kai, Jorn Juhl, Hans and Eskildsen, Jacob. (2001), Benchmarking excellence, Measuring Business Eccellence, 5(1), 19-23. Leonard, Denis and Mc Adam, Rodney. (2002), The role of the business excellence model in operational and strategic decision making, Management Decision, 40(1), 17-27. Luka, Koper. (2004), Letno porocilo 2004, Koper: Cukgraf d.o.o. Luka, Koper. (2005). Letno porocilo 2005, Koper: Cukgraf d.o.o. Luka, Koper. (2006a), Letno porocilo 2006, Koper: Cukgraf d.o.o. Luka, Koper. (2006b), Gradivo za poslovno odlicnost po modelu EFQM za leto 2006, Interno gradivo, Luka Koper. Luka, Koper. (2007), http: //www.luka-kp.si /eng /vsebina.asp?IDpm=131 (15.7.2007). Luka, Koper. (2008a), Nerevidirano porocilo o poslovanju druzbe Luka Koper, d.d. in skupine Luka Koper v obdobju januar ­ september 2008, . http://www.luka-kp.si/slo/za-vlagatelje/poslovna-porocila (2.2.2009). Luka, Koper. (2008), Portal. http://www.luka-kp.si/default.asp (27.3.2008). Mangelsdorf, Dietmar. (1999), Evolution from quality management to an integrative management system based on TQM and its impact on the profession of quality managers in industry, The TQM Magazine, 11(6), 419-424. Mann, R. in Grigg, N. (2006), A Study of National Strategies for Organizational Excellence, Multinational Alliance for the Advancement of Organizational Excellence Conference: Oxymorons, Empty Boxes or important Contributions to Mangement Thought and Practice.Sydney 2006, Proceedings. Sydney: Multinational Alliance for the Advancement of Organizational Excellence. Miyagawa, Masahiro and Yoshida, Kosaku. (2005), An empirical study of TQM practicies in Japaneseowned manufacturers in China, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 22(6), 536553. Oakland, John S. (2004), Oakland on Quality Management, Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. Pavlin, Barbara. (2007), Poslovna odlicnost za povecanje ekonomske blaginje drzave, Delo FT, 2.julija. 2007, 28. Piskar, Franka and Dolinsek, Slavko. (2006a), Implementation of the ISO 9001:from QMS to business model, Industrial Management & Data Systems, 106(9), 1333-1343. Piskar, Franka and Dolinsek, Slavko. (2006b), Ucinki standarda kakovosti ISO: od managementa kakovosti do poslovnega modela, Koper: Fakulteta za management Koper. PWHC, PriceWaterHouseCoopers. (2000), Portal. Report on the Evaluation of the Public Sector Excellence Programme: Survey Results, http ://archive.cabinetoffice.gov.uk /eeg/2001/pwcreport/pwcreport.pdf (10.8.2007). Samuelsson, Peter and Nilsson, Lars Erik. (2001), Self-assessment practicies in large organizations. The International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 19(1), 10-23. Savic, Nenad. (2007), Z uporabo modela odlicnosti EFQM do vecje vrednosti podjetja, Delo FT, 2.julija, 28.

13

Skubic, I. and Kern Pipan, K. (2005), Priznanje Republike Slovenije za poslovno odlicnost in evropska nagrada za kakovost, 17. Forum odlicnosti in mojstrstva, Novo mesto: Drustvo ekonomistov Dolenjske in Bele krajine. Urad RS za meroslovje MIRS. (2004), Model odlicnosti, Velika podjetja. Ljubljana: Ministrstvo za solstvo, znanost in sport. Urad RS za meroslovje MIRS. (2006), Evropski moduli usposabljanja za ocenjevalce: Usposabljanja za ocenjevalce, Ljubljana: Urad RS za meroslovje. van der Wiele, A., Williams, A.R.T. and et al. (1996), Self-assessment: A study of progress in Europe´s leading organizations in quality management practicies. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 13(1), 84-104. van der Wiele, A., Williams, A.R.T. and Dale, BG. (2000), ISO 9000 series registration to business excellence: the migratory path, Business Process Management Journal, 6(5), 417-427. Yin, Robert K. (1994), Case study research: design and methods, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

14

Information

Microsoft Word - 2 Janes Dolinsek.doc

14 pages

Report File (DMCA)

Our content is added by our users. We aim to remove reported files within 1 working day. Please use this link to notify us:

Report this file as copyright or inappropriate

183035


Notice: fwrite(): send of 201 bytes failed with errno=104 Connection reset by peer in /home/readbag.com/web/sphinxapi.php on line 531