January 2003
Volume 10 • Number 1

Contents

Introduction

I am pleased to announce that Quality Management Journal is soliciting papers for an upcoming special issue on Customer Defined Quality. This issue will deal with the ways that the increased customer leverage impacts the way quality is managed, as customers become more actively involved in the quality of the products and services they purchase. There are many possible topics for papers within this broad category. Potential topics include, but are not limited to, customer involvement, customer satisfaction, customer metrics, alternative definitions and perceptions of quality, management of the customer interface, impact of electronic customer interfaces, customer relationship management, and other topics related to customer defined quality. Empirical, conceptual, and research case-study articles on topics related to customer-defined quality are encouraged. Please see the complete instructions for authors at the back of this issue for manuscript preparation details. The deadline for submission of articles for the special issue is July 1, 2003.

This issue focuses primarily on quality in service organizations. We begin with “The Importance of Reliability and Customization from Goods to Services,” by Michael D. Johnson of the University of Michigan and Lars Nilsson of Karlstad University, Sweden. They examine the importance of various perceptions of quality on the continuum from pure services to pure goods. Using the American Customer Satisfaction Index data, they conclude that reliability and customization play different roles in driving customer satisfaction, although both are important determinants of customer satisfaction. They found that reliability is the most important dimension of quality in service organizations, where it is critical to avoid problems, since rework is challenging in face-to-face service operations. However, moving down the continuum toward pure goods, the role of customization becomes more important. This study of perceptions of quality has important implications for those managing quality in service and manufacturing organizations.

The quality of the service provided by quality consultants is examined in “The Quality of the Quality Consultants: An Empirical Study,” by Frederic Marimon Viadiu of the Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Marti Casadesus Fa of the Universitat de Girona, and Inaki Heras Saizarbitoria of the Universidad del Pais Vasco, all of Spain. They used a questionnaire based on the SERVQUAL instrument to compare client expectations and perceptions of the service provided by ISO 9000 consultants in Spain. They found that, although the service was regarded favorably overall, the clients expected higher quality than they actually received. This was particularly true for those who had received their service from small consulting companies, rather than large independent professional consultants.

The third article examines the relationship between quality and productivity in a service organization. Constantine Kontoghiorghes of Oakland University studied a large number of indicators of quality and productivity with employees of a health-care insurance company in “Examining the Association Between Quality and Productivity Performance in a Service Organization.” He found a strong relationship between many of the quality and productivity indicators, indicating that investments in quality initiatives should yield productivity gains. The strongest predictor of productivity was consistency.

We close with examination of an approach for moving from the use of self-assessment tools to practice. A.M. Ahmed of Bradford University, J.B. Yang, and B.G. Dale of the Manchester School of Management, England, present a detailed examination and tutorial on the use of multiple-criteria decision-making and the evidential reasoning approach, as well as other tools, in “Self-Assessment Methodology: The Route to Business Excellence.” Too many organizations stop with self-assessment, struggling with how to convert their findings into strategic, tactical, and operational plans and procedures. This approach provides a practical method for making this transition.

Combined, these articles provide an examination of quality in service operations, as well as manufacturing. They look at the way in which quality is perceived, as well as how quality management is implemented and related to other competitive goals.

Barbara B. Flynn
Editor

Quality Management Journal

EDITORIAL

EDITOR
Barbara B. Flynn
Wake Forest University

PAST EDITOR
George S. Easton
Emory University

FOUNDING EDITOR
William A. Golomski

BOOK REVIEW EDITOR
James B. Kohnen
St. Mary’s College of California

PUBLISHER
William Tony

MANUSCRIPT COORDINATOR
David Nelsen

COPY EDITORS
Leigh Ann Klaus
Kris McEachern

PRODUCTION
Cathy Schnackenberg

DIGITAL PRODUCTION SPECIALISTS
Jen Czajka
Laura Franceschi

HTML CODING
Laura Franceschi

EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD

John Anderson
University of Minnesota

Selwyn Becker
University of Chicago

Robert E. Cole
University of California

James W. Dean, Jr.
University of North Carolina

James R. Evans
University of Cincinnati

John P. Evans
University of North Carolina

Frank M. Gryna
University of Tampa

John Hamburg
APEX, Inc.

David Luther
Luther Quality Associates

Ram Narasimhan
Michigan State University

Duke Oakes
Applied Logistical Methods

Roger G. Schroeder
University of Minnesota

Kalyan Singhal
University of Baltimore

Michael J. Stahl
University of Tennessee

EDITORIAL REVIEW BOARD

Sanjay Ahire
University of Dayton

Susan D. Amundson
Arizona State University

Kimberly A. Bates*
University of Toronto

Paul M. Bobrowski
Syracuse University

Kenneth Boyer
Michigan State University

Kenneth E. Case
Oklahoma State University

Injazz Chen
Cleveland State University

Barrie Dale*
University of Manchester

Richard Deane
Georgia State University

John Delery
University of Arkansas

Kevin Dooley
Arizona State University

Edward Duplaga
Bowling Green State University

Susan West Engelkemeyer
Babson College

Byron Finch
Miami University

Mark P. Finster
University of Wisconsin

Laura Forker
University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth

Soumen Ghosh
Georgia Institute of Technology

Glenn H. Gilbreath
Virginia Commonwealth University

John M. Groocock*
TRW (Retired)

Robert Handfield
North Carolina State University

Sandra J. Hartman
University of New Orleans

Marilyn Helms
Dalton State College

Mary Collins Holcomb
University of Tennessee

Ann Jordan
University of North Texas

Gary Kern
Indiana University South Bend

Jill Phelps Kern
Digital Semiconductor

David Kerridge*
Aberdeen University

Ray A. Klotz
Qualcomm Inc.

Frank Knight
FISI Madison Financial

Ronald D. Kurtzmann
Diamond Management Systems

Keong Leong
The Ohio State University

A. Magid Mazen
Suffolk University

Satish Mehra
University of Memphis

Kim I. Melton
North Georgia College and State University

Henry R. Neave*
British Deming Association

Yoram Neumann
California State University

William Newman
Miami University

Gary Ragatz
Michigan State University

Gipsie B. Ranney
Belmont University

Richard N. Rosett
Rochester Institute of Technology

Brooke Saladin
Wake Forest University

Helmut Schneider
Louisiana State University

Nirmal Sethia
California State Polytechnic University

John G. Surak
Clemson University

William Tallon
Northern Illinois University

Michael D. Tveite
The Tetrad Group

Peter Ward
The Ohio State University

L. David Weller
University of Georgia

Ted Weston
Colorado State University

*International reviewer

Return to top