Quality Excellence in Complex Supply Networks - EFQM Excellence Model Reconsidered

This article was downloaded by: [UZH Hauptbibliothek / Zentralbibliothek Zrich]
On: 06 May 2015, At: 18:20

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Total Quality Management & Business

Excellence
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ctqm20
Quality excellence in complex supply

networks: EFQM excellence model
reconsidered
a
Goknur Arzu Akyuz
a
Department of Industrial Engineering, Atilim University,
Kizilcasar Mahallesi, 06836 Incek Golbasi, Ankara, Turkey
Published online: 26 Jun 2014.
Click for updates
To cite this article: Goknur Arzu Akyuz (2014): Quality excellence in complex supply networks:
EFQM excellence model reconsidered, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, DOI:
10.1080/14783363.2014.929253
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2014.929253
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [UZH Hauptbibliothek / Zentralbibliothek Zrich] at 18:20 06 May 2015
Total Quality Management, 2014
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2014.929253
Quality excellence in complex supply networks: EFQM excellence

model reconsidered
Goknur Arzu Akyuz
Department of Industrial Engineering, Atilim University, Kizilcasar Mahallesi, 06836 Incek

Golbasi, Ankara, Turkey
Under the business pressures and megatrends shaping todays supply chains (SCs),
enterprises have to compete and sustain as part of increasingly complex, highly
interdependent and web-enabled supply networks. Achieving excellence in such a
context has a meaning far beyond excellence within the enterprise boundaries and
requires more than successfully established and maintained enterprise systems.
Extant literature from both SC Management and Quality Management domains still
appear to lack comprehensive and clarified definitions and requirements for quality
excellence within complex supply networks. To contribute in this direction, this
study aims at defining, clarifying and discussing quality excellence requirements
within collaborative and complex supply networks. All the principles, discussions
and requirements are structured and founded on the components of well-established
European Foundation for Quality Managements (EFQM) Excellence Model.
Therefore, this article answers the following research questions: What are the
requirements of excellence in complex supply networks? and How EFQM
components should be considered and treated in a collaborative setting? The
contribution of this study lies in providing the requirements, definitions and
extensions of EFQM components and a multi-partner representation for the extended
setting. The findings suggest that a multi-partner, collaborative and network-centric
understanding of each EFQM components is needed with respect to the soft and
hard aspects, while a cross-partner excellence mindset is to be deployed across the
network.
Keywords: quality excellence; EFQM model; complex supply networks
1. Introduction
Supply networks (SNs) constitute a variety of organisations that are largely autonomous,
geographically distributed and heterogeneous in terms of their operating environment,
culture, social capital and goals, and that collaborate for jointly generating value and achiev-
ing common objectives (Camarinha-Matos, Oliveira, & Afsarmanesh, 2009). In todays
business world, enterprises have to survive as part of these complex dependencies, and
SNs are shaped by the key notions of sustainability, speed, flexibility, agility, proactiveness,
risk management, value chain, global market and society as stakeholder. With IT as the
greatest enabler (Ross, 2003; Gunasekaran, Ngai, & McGaughey, 2006; Sanders, 2007),
they become highly interdependent, collaboration-oriented and web-enabled structures
(Emmet & Crocker, 2006; Akyuz & Gursoy, 2011). In line with these changes, the field
of Quality Management (QM) has experienced a move-away from line-based, inspection
orientation to a collaboration-based understanding focusing on process cooperation,
systems integration and product lifecycle management (Shaoshao, Wu, Deng, & Li, 2006;

Email: arzuakyuz@atilim.edu.tr
# 2014 Taylor & Francis

2 G.A. Akyuz
Akyuz, 2011). In this context, the relevance of business excellence is well supported for
long-term competitiveness and sustainability (Mann, 2011).
Managing quality in a global and networked context requires cross-cultural, cross-
nation approaches and faces the principal agent problem, referring to the situation in
which agents pursue their own goals while sacrificing the overall goals and objectives
(Hung, 2011). In this context, presence and maintenance of within-enterprise Quality
Assurance (QA) systems are no longer sufficient to provide competitiveness and sustain-
ability, either for the enterprise or the network. An extended, multi-actor, network-based
view of QA across partners is needed with a continuous focus on joint process planning
and control in a visible and integrated manner (Batson & McGough, 2007). It inherently
demands visibility, traceability, accountability and auditability of all the processes across
partners, bringing in the concept of Collaborative Quality Management and Extended/
Network-based Excellence. These ideas are rooted at Kanji and Wong (1999) and Kanji
(2001) who have highlighted the need for creating a cooperative quality culture, man-
aging all processes other than logistics, leadership and continuous improvement across
the whole Supply Chain (SC).
The study by Akyuz (2011) focuses on the intersection of SC, Collaboration and
QM domains. In QM literature, the European Foundation for Quality Management
(EFQM) model appears as one of the most fundamental and prominent models aimed at
defining excellence in an organisation (Balbastre-Benavent & Canet-Giner, 2011; Lu,
Betts, & Croom, 2011; Mokhtar et al., 2012). The model is a self-assessment tool and a
strategic weapon as a facilitator for integrative strategy formation process, enabling
rational, emergent strategy formation (link between strategic management and business
excellence) and leading to better flexibility and performance (Balbastre-Benavent &
Canet-Giner, 2011).
Akyuz (2011) highlights that various quality excellence models and award criteria are
criticised in the literature as not being chain-centric. It is argued that although attaching
special importance to result orientation, customer focus and partnership development, the
current excellence models treat inter-company interactions at a dyadic partnership level
rather than at a web-based, full process collaboration level in networked structures. The
study comprehensively discusses the extension efforts in the literature to obtain an
extended quality excellence model for SC Management; namely the Kanjis Extended
Quality Excellence Model (Kanji, 2001), and Wong (2003)s SC Management Excellence
Model building upon the Kanjis Excellence Model. It is revealed that modernisation and
extension efforts for the ideas of Total Quality Management (TQM), quality assurance,
excellence and awarding from the QM domain do not seem to meet the needs of the
new SC era, although these efforts did broaden the perspectives and highlighted the impor-
tance of SC Quality Management.
Akyuz (2011) also provides a detailed discussion justifying that models and
approaches from the SC domain lack QM orientation and a viewpoint of excellence.
Support can be found that current literature is still in need of further integration of the
ideas of collaboration, quality assurance, SC, quality system documentation, quality
awards and excellence to obtain a coherent, supply-centric and excellence-oriented colla-
borative quality model (Akyuz, 2011; Lu et al., 2011).
In this context, this study aims at investigating the requirements of excellence in
complex, collaborative SNs to reveal how EFQM components should be treated in a col-
laborative enterprise setting, and suggests a multi-partner representation of the EFQM
model for the collaborative context. The methodology followed is a fundamental explora-
tory research based on extensive literature review and EFQM excellence model structure.
Total Quality Management 3
Depending on the commonalities in the core values and components of the various existing
excellence models, the study is structured around EFQM components without loss of gen-
erality. Section 2 puts forward the key requirements and drivers of extended excellence in
complex SNs. Section 3 includes a mapping of these requirements on the EFQM com-
ponents based on the latest version (2013) of the EFQM Model (www.efqm.org), provid-
ing a generic representation, clarifications, extended definitions and comprehensive
discussions for each EFQM component in a multi-partner setting. Section 4 concludes
with further research suggestions.
2. Keys to collaborative supply network excellence

Recent literature at the intersection of collaboration and SC fully supports and high-
lights the importance of lean, extended and beyond Enterprise Requirements Planning
(ERP) structures from the people, process, technology and infrastructure perspectives
(Burton & Boeder, 2003; Bendoly & Jacobs, 2005; Loh, Koh, & Simpson, 2006; Plenerty,
2007). It is widely acknowledged that SNs of today are far from being isolated, enterprise-
based structures and buyer-supplier dyads. Instead, they have become web-based, colla-
borative, extended and complex structures (Folan & Browne, 2005; Zsidisin & Ritchie,
2009; Xu, 2011; Wilhelm, 2011; Hearnshaw & Wilson, 2013). Therefore, excellence
has to be treated in this setting which highlights some common and repeatedly emphasised
themes.
Hofman, OMarah, and Elvy (2011) from Gartner Group define the following main
themes to determine SC excellence: resilience, value chain network integration, vision,
sustainable execution and orchestration. Along with the critical capabilities of speed,
agility, efficiency, responsiveness and innovation, the concept of resilience is emphasised,
referring to the ability of delivering predictable results and staying in the game despite
volatility. In this sense, resilience is the proactive, structured and integrated exploration
of capabilities within the SC to cope with unforeseen events, ability of the SC to return to
its original state or move to a new, more desirable state after being disturbed (Christopher
& Peck, 2004; Collicchia, Dallari, & Melacini, 2010). The importance of sustainability for
SCs is already apparent by the growing interest in the topic (Camarinha-Matos, Bouche, &
Afsharmanesh, 2010; Nagurney & Nagurney, 2010; Chaabane, Ramudin, & Paquet,
2011). Hence, it stands out as a key requirement for excellence, involving both continuity
in the long run and environmental aspects.
In a multi-enterprise setting, capabilities of flexibility, speed, agility, responsiveness,
resilience and sustainability are to be interpreted and sought for the overall network. This
demands the leagile philosophy to be followed across the network for achieving a stra-
tegic balance between lean and agile capabilities (Mason-Jones, Naylor, & Towill, 2000;
Ketchen & Hult, 2007; Swafford, Ghosh, & Murthy, 2008; Jafarnejad & Shahaie, 2008).
Being lean or agile from the enterprise perspective is definitely vital; however, an overall
strategy for the entire network is also needed to combine the advantages of both lean and
agile sides.
Gilmore (2011) points out 10 markers as critical for excellence: alignment, strategic
depth, customer satisfaction with SC performance, network design, macro agility, talent
management, technology management, collaboration intensity and SC culture. The key
excellence drivers are mentioned as: connectivity, visibility, collaboration, optimisation,
execution and speed.
Rudzki, Smock, Katzorke, & Stewart (2005), Poirier and Morgan (2009), and Rudzki
and Trent (2011) highlight the following as elements for excellence:
4 G.A. Akyuz
. sound strategy supported by solid leadership;

. alignment with corporate strategy;
. selective collaboration with trusted business partners;
. strategic integration with both suppliers and customers;
. excellence in strategic sourcing;
. world class logistics excellence;
. proficiency in planning and responsiveness;
. ability to anticipate and manage risks;
. global optimisation and clear linkage with financial end results.
The repeated emphasis on the concepts of sound strategy, collaboration, strategic

integration and beyond logistics is striking, which lend further support to the previous
citations. Collaborating, highly dependent, strategically aligned and extended structures
which have already excelled in sourcing and logistics aspects are in question. Also the
ability to engage in collaborative risk management appears as a key issue to ensure that
risks are handled and mitigated at the network level (Oehmen, Ziegenbein, Alard, &
Schonsleben, 2009; Zsidisin & Ritchie, 2009). Evidently, this is far beyond operational
efficiencies and excellence of individual partners.
Wiebe (2004) describes the following five-staged evolution towards world class excel-
lence, depicted in Figure 1.
. Stage 1 Reporting: SC reporting, dominated by pre-defined queries.

. Stage 2 Analysing: Event monitoring and alerting, supported by ad hoc queries.
. Stage 3 Predicting: Impact prediction, analytics, feedback.
. Stage 4 Operationalising: Point of cause, continuous update, workflow
management.
Figure 1. Evolving into a world class supply chain (Weibe, 2004).

. Stage 5 Active warehousing: Implementation, issue resolution with what-if scen-

arios tied to operational metrics/systems, operational system visibility, full closed-
loop workflows.
This evolution clearly emphasises the importance of full visibility, predictive and proac-
tive abilities, and the need to evolve from reactive reporting capabilities towards business
intelligence. These stages are fully supported by the evolution of the capabilities of current
Enterprise Application Integration suites such as SAP Netweaver, IBM BizTalk (Akyuz &
Rehan, 2009; Akyuz & Gursoy, 2011). This is obviously way beyond transactional integrity;
requiring creation, exchange and utilisation of knowledge and business intelligence.
Hence, Full Visibility, Integrity, Process Orchestration, Collaboration, Stra-

tegic Orientation and Proactiveness stand out as the key excellence themes in
complex SNs. Enabled by the current state-of-the-art IT technology, network-level ana-
lytics, early warning, what-if and knowledge management capabilities become the most
critical ingredients.
3. EFQM model in collaborative networks

In line with the key items discussed in Section 2, this section puts forward how these excel-
lence ideas map onto the EFQM model for a collaborative network. As one of the most
fundamental models in the literature, the subsections here are organised under the head-
ings of EFQM components to contain a detailed coverage for the meaning, main issues
and requirements for each EFQM component within an extended context. The basic
EFQM subcomponent principles are considered as the basis under each heading.
In its very recently revised form (version 2013), the basic components of the most fun-
damental excellence model are given below Figure 2:
It should be noted that this subcomponent structure is fundamentally similar to, and
compatible with, the Baldrige Excellence Model, which is another key model including
Figure 2. EFQM components (www.efqm.org).

6 G.A. Akyuz
leadership, strategic planning, customer focus, workforce focus, process orientation,

measurement and analysis, and results orientation as the main excellence criteria (Porter
& Tanner, 2004; Baldrige Publications, 2013). Hence, this study is both generalisable
and applicable to the Baldrige Model. In fact, it is well-supported in the literature that
existing excellence frameworks (including others such as the Singapore Quality Award
Framework and the Canadian Framework for Business Excellence) exhibit basically
similar subcomponent structures and encompass these common core values: visionary lea-
dership, focus on strategy, process-driven systems perspective, focusing on key results and
value creation, customer orientation and valuing the workforce and business partners
(Porter & Tanner, 2004; Dodangeh et al., 2012; Burton, 2013; www.bpir.com). Burton
(2013) clearly states that identifiable excellence frameworks worldwide reveal a 90% cor-
relation between them all, and the body of knowledge is similar. Therefore the subcompo-
nents and multi-partner representation throughout the rest of this study are arranged and
founded on the EFQM structure without any loss of generality.
In its latest revision, the EFQM model is revised to put more emphasis on agility, sus-
tainability and innovation. Despite these extensions, the model still evaluates excellence
from the perspective of a certain enterprise and neglects multi-enterprise, complex and
network-based relationships which are interactions beyond dyadic relationships within a
network. Keeping a holistic view is needed for obtaining network-centric results while
avoiding suboptimalities favouring individual enterprises (ODonnell, 2005; Gordon,
Loeb, & Tseng, 2009; Oehmen et al., 2009).
The previous section stated that visibility, interaction, alignment and collaboration are
the keys for network-level excellence. When viewed from the EFQM perspective, this
means visibility, interaction, alignment and collaboration across all EFQM components
for driving the network to the desired results. Thus, the following representation applies
as given in Figure 3.
This figure contains the EFQM components for multiple enterprises. The arrows represent
alignment, interaction and collaboration along each component across partners. This is fully
in line with extant literature, clearly emphasising alignment as the essence of management,
a management tool, critical to business excellence, cohesive culture, the degree to
which compatibility exists, and fit relationship to participants (Hultman & Gellerman,
2002; Fitzpatrick, 2007; Francisco, Azevedo, Bastos, & Almeida, 2011). In the literature,
systems alignment among partner systems is basically treated along with the well-supported
dimensions of strategy, organisational structure and cultural alignment, business processes,
and IT tools and infrastructure (Tosti & Jackson, 2003; Schneider & Schneider, 2007). Evi-
dently, these dimensions are in total compliance with the EFQM components. As such, the
alignment concept involves both the hard and soft aspects of organisations, fostering com-
munication, decreasing information asymmetry and becoming the key for the collaboration
development process (Beyerlein, McGee, Klein, Nemiro, & Broedling, 2003; Munkvold,
2005; Fitzpatrick, 2007; Genoulaz, Campagne, Llerena, & Pellegrin, 2010).
In short, excellence in a collaborative network should be viewed as aligned and colla-
borating EFQM components beyond enterprise borders. With this understanding, the rest
of this section discusses and clarifies how each EFQM component should be understood
and treated in a collaborative setting.
3.1. Leadership
When considered from the network perspective, this component defines a leadership under-
standing beyond a single enterprise with unclear boundaries (Burton & Boeder, 2003;
Figure 3. Multi-partner EFQM representation.
Crossan, Gandz, & Seitjz, 2010) and requires driving different enterprises with non-uniform
missions, skills, capabilities, values and performances towards agreed-upon and network-
level mission, vision and objectives (Wong, 2001; IT Governance Institute, 2005). At this
point, the main issues are setting direction for the entire network and ensuring alignment of
multiple collaborating partners. Creation and maintenance of a permanent collaborative
culture is needed (Wong, 2001; Robinson & Malhotra, 2005). Therefore, transformational
leadership is essential for managing strategic, tactical and operational change (Crossan
et al., 2010; Nightingale & Srinivasan, 2011). Conflict resolution, negotiation skills, ensur-
ing goal congruence and managing power asymmetries in a multi-cultural environment
stand out as key leadership skills (Croom, 2007). This demands flexible leadership with
the ability to think globally, regionally, and locally all at the same time (Korhonen,
2010). Ensuring that leading and laggard partners receive different treatments is vital,
and cross-cultural coordination of dynamic teams having memberships from different enter-
prises across the network is to be accomplished. Hence, in parallel with and based on the
EFQM subcomponents, leadership in a collaborative context has the following
requirements:
. Assuring constancy of purpose at network level.

. Joint development and systematic review of mission, vision, values and role models.
. Assuming responsibility for the development, implementation and continuous
improvement of an overall management control system.
. Creating a culture of cross-border excellence and continuous improvement;
. Managing cultural differences.
8 G.A. Akyuz
. Managing cross-border teams.

. Managing conflict resolution and power asymmetries across the network.
With these characteristics, leadership in an extended environment involves fresh opportu-

nities and challenges for all partners.
3.2. Strategy
Strategy development in a multi-partner, collaborative environment requires the resolution
of the basic dilemma of valuing sustainability and well-being of the network over the inter-
ests of individual actors. Undoubtedly, this is beyond strategy development for a single
enterprise (Sehgal, 2011). For achieving coherence and managing complexity, shared
goals and strategies among partners must be created (Robinson & Malhotra, 2005). To
remain competitive, the nature of strategy should change from imitative and reactive
to innovative and proactive, with the awareness of new risk structures (Korhonen,
2010). Hence, the following stand out under these headings:
. Ensuring strategic decisions which avoid suboptimalities and value the overall
network with an holistic view.
. Establishing mechanisms for collaborative policy and strategy development,
reviewing and updating towards the needs of the entire network.
. Ensuring deployment of policy and strategy across multiple partners through key
business processes.
. Ensuring cross-border accountability and responsibility delegations.
. Valuing partnerships and long-term relations in the overall strategy development
and strategic management process.
Since alignment, goal congruence and conflict resolution at strategic level are the criti-
cal issues, this heading is very closely coupled with sound network-level leadership to
proactively define, deploy, delegate and review the strategic decisions. The implication
is an effective, dynamic strategic board across partners with representatives from all rel-
evant enterprises. This subcomponent as well represents fresh opportunities from the stra-
tegic management perspective.
3.3. People
In a collaborative context, joint management of cross-border, cross-cultural people
resource at all temporal levels (strategic, tactical and operational) is needed. To ensure
this, a number of boundaries (functional, cultural, geographical and informational) con-
straining workforce productivity and preventing enterprises from realising their full poten-
tial must be overcome (www.ibm.com, 2010; Guo, 2005; Schuler, Jackson, & Luo, 2004).
The assumptions, beliefs and values guiding the perceptions and behaviours of people also
become a critical component in forming a cooperative relationship among organisations
with different backgrounds and working styles (Silverstone, Wallis, & Mindrum, 2012).
Hence, the following appear fundamental in managing people:
. Ensuring joint, effective sharing of human resource across borders.

. Establishing joint education, skills and career planning systems across partners.
. Forming jointly designed motivation, rewarding and recognition systems.
. Ensuring cross-border involvement, empowerment, teamwork and commitment

towards network-centric goals.
. Creating an environment with cross-border trust, openness, fairness and equality.
. Establishing and maintaining jointly designed formal and informal modes of cross-
enterprise dialogue.
It is obvious that the basic principles of TQM culture (such as valuing people, team-
work, motivation and empowerment) should still remain at the core. This is wholly in line
with the previous efforts of extend TQM and extended quality observed in the literature
(Kanji, 2001; Wong, 2003). However, assimilation and deployment within the enterprise
boundaries are no longer sufficient. A working culture valuing openness, trust and cross-
border teams should be deployed throughout the entire network, requiring a total and
collaborative mindset to flourish at all levels of the network.
Within this extended culture, ensuring responsibility, accountability, authority,
mutuality and partnership at strategic, tactical and operational levels is needed across
the network. This is possible by creating and managing cross-border responsibility
centres, representing the extension of the well-proven responsibility centre concept of
accounting and budget control literature (Strauss & Curry, 2002; Obreja, 2008).
3.4. Partnerships and resources

It has already become clear that collaboration is one of the most critical themes on the way
to SN excellence. In line with the resource-based view and network-based views of stra-
tegic management, all kinds of resources are to be utilised for the competitive advantage
of the network (Halldorsson, Kotzab, Mikkola, & Tage Skjtt-Larsen, 2007). Establishing
and managing collaborative, long-term partnerships towards joint resource management
and control become a vital factor (Emmet & Crocker, 2006; Arshinder & Deshmukh,
2008; Akyuz & Gursoy, 2010). The literature fully supports the view that ideas of collab-
oration, partnership and resource management are beyond joint management of the
material management-related activities, logistics and Collaborative Planning, Forecasting
and Replenishment (CPFR) cycle (Akyuz & Gursoy, 2010; Akyuz & Gursoy, 2011;
Alfaro-Saiz, Rodrigez, & Verdecho, 2011). In fact, they even extend to joint performance
and risk management and joint financial planning (Zsidisin & Ritchie, 2009). Hence, all
business processes and resources have to be involved. Within this broadened scope, partner-
ships are beyond supplier, subcontractor and customer relationships, involving other stake-
holders such as logistics providers and IT service providers. Hence, this subheading
demands:
. Considering core competencies and strategic capabilities in relation to strategic

network-level decisions.
. Selecting and establishing a long-term partner base in relation to competencies and
network-level strategies.
. Establishing the scope of collaboration with each partner.
. Setting mechanisms for collaborative planning, control and resource sharing among
partners.
. Ensuring risk and reward sharing mechanisms.
Inevitably, this extended collaboration scope requires sharing of information to ensure

information symmetry and visibility for all the processes among partners, highlighting
10 G.A. Akyuz
the vital enabling role of IT in SC collaboration (Lee & Whang, 2000; Gunasekaran et al.,
2006; Akyuz & Gursoy, 2011). Thus, information and knowledge become critical
resources to be managed across partners. In light of this, extended management of hetero-
geneous IT infrastructures and ensuring their integrity become the main concerns. With
recent IT advances, this means capturing the benefits of technologies including Service-
Oriented Architectures and Cloud Computing to ensure platform-independence, reusabil-
ity, sharing, outsourcing and renting of IT resources (infrastructure, software and services)
(Akyuz, 2008; Marks & Lozano, 2010; Rehan & Akyuz, 2010; Shacklett, 2011). Hence,
partnerships developed with the IT service providers gain special importance for the
entire network (Marks & Lozano, 2010; Shacklett, 2011).
3.5. Processes, products and services

With the extended collaboration scope described above, various processes beyond
material management and logistics become involved as well. Hence, this subcomponent
of EFQM encompasses collaborative:
. design of business processes, products and services;

. planning, execution and control of processes;
W CPFR
W supplier relationship management;
W customer relationship management;
W performance and risk management;
W financial planning;
W managerial control (on-line, real-time reporting, alerting and managerial action)
. reengineering of business processes, products and services.
It should be noted that sharing of information starting with the design cycle of a
product/service is crucial (Wang, Xie, Neelamkavil, & Perdasani, 2002; Li, 2006;
Trappey & Hsiao, 2008), since incorporating feedback from all relevant partners into
the design phase becomes the basis for obtaining a customer-centric structure.
Assessment of suppliers systems and performance, collaborative efforts for training,
and improvement at all processes, and establishing an awareness of excellence at the sup-
plier side become keys for the overall network excellence (Mann, 2011; Baldrige Publi-
cations, 2011).
In this context, business process management assumes a vital role in defining standar-
dised workflows (Cardoso & Aalst, 2009) and contributes to business excellence by ensuring
a uniform way of working across the network (Looy, Backer, & Poels, 2011). The ability to
collaboratively cover the stages of process design, modelling, execution, monitoring and
optimisation provides a holistic, process-based view (Cardoso & Aalst, 2009; Liu, Li, &
Zhao, 2009; Bouchbout, Akoka, & Alimazighi, 2012). Obtaining agreed-upon, sound and
commonly-shared cross-border process definitions, and engineering them as needed
become the basis for joint planning, control, execution and managerial action (Liu et al.,
2009). Consequently, joint business process reengineering lies at the centre of excellence.
3.6. Results
Obtaining excellent results in the collaborative context demands focusing on network-
level outcomes rather than enterprise-level ones. RADAR (results-approaches-deploy-
Figure 4. RADAR systematic of EFQM (www.efqm.org).
assess-refine) systematic of the EFQM model, as given in Figure 4, has to be performed at

the network level:
This systematic has to be deployed at strategic, tactical and operational levels under
the responsibility and accountability of cross-border teams towards network-centric
results. The desired results should be collaboratively defined, developed and deployed
upon consensus. Joint assessments and refinements have to be conducted for improve-
ments towards overall network well-being. Effective, holistic, process-based, strategy-
aligned and collaborative performance measurement systems are needed (Verdecho,
Jose & Rau, 2009; Agami, Saleh, & Rasmy, 2012). This is evidently beyond performance
management and self-assessment of an enterprise, requiring measurements for the
extended network rather than for a single partner (Folan & Browne, 2005). This
demands: (a) network-level, agreed-upon definitions of outcomes, performance and risk
metrics; (b) joint performance and risk follow-up; (c) joint managerial action; and (d)
joint managerial dashboards. These requirements are well-supported by the current SC
performance and risk management literature, indicating the immaturity of collaborative
models in this direction (Busi & Bititci, 2006; Zsidisin & Ritchie, 2009; Akyuz &
Gursoy, 2010; Tang & Musa, 2010; Ferreira, Silva, Strauhs, & Soares, 2011).
From the business perspective, the main excellence determinants of agility, flexibility,
speed, resilience and sustainability have to be measured and followed-up at the network
level. Hence, agreed-upon network-level metrics to measure these aspects are vital
along with traditional inventory and logistics-oriented metrics. In this respect, the litera-
ture has been proved to be immature (Akyuz & Erkan, 2010; Alfaro-Saiz et al., 2011).
An agreed-upon practical set of metrics is also needed for measuring the degree of collab-
oration as well as the environmental and societal results across the network. Consequently,
joint measurement and control systems to maintain the pulse of the overall network will be
the key to network-level excellence.
12 G.A. Akyuz
4. Conclusion
Based on the well-established EFQM components, this study provided a comprehensive
discussion regarding the concept of excellence in complex SNs. Development of
visibility, jointness and collaboration among partners stands out as the key themes,
and it has become evident that enterprise-centric paradigms can only lead to suboptimal
results when the entire network is considered. Therefore, a network-centric approach to
ensure alignment and collaborative management of all EFQM components proves to be
critical. In this context, establishing, managing and improving the supplier-side relations
and creating a collaborative environment are among the main issues.
This study revealed that obtaining leverage, setting directions, cross-border leadership,
strategy development and managing people for the overall network become indispensable.
With extended borders of responsibility, this represents an entirely redefined
organisational understanding and working culture. It is also revealed that network-level
control of partnerships, resources, product and processes demand long-term and mutually
beneficial collaborations based on trust, joint business process reengineering and process-
based, collaborative management control systems. This is a radical shift from the notion of
enterprise-based planning, control and execution. Again, results orientation requires a
radical transformation from valuing enterprise-centric results to systematic network-
level ones. Tight couplings at operational, tactical and strategic levels have to be
created and critical indicators, reporting, alerting and early warning mechanisms have
to be defined and interpreted at the network level.
Consequently, quality excellence understanding in todays harsh global business arena
demands a thoroughly redefined understanding of EFQM components of both hard and
soft aspects. Although the basics remain at the core, issues are beyond being excellent
within the enterprise borders. For this reason, excellence mindset should be deployed to
all partners throughout the network.
The generalisability of this study beyond EFQM Model is discussed comprehensively
and made evident. In its current form, this study does not contain field-related research as
its shortcoming. However, with its generic, conceptual character, it can be a sound base for
a multitude of further field research. Future research can design various comparative
studies under different sector-specific and network-specific settings to reveal the degree
of variation in the suggested excellence understanding, requirements and the multi-
partner representation.
In conclusion, this study has clearly shown that the area of multi-partner, collaborative
excellence is open to further research from organisational, managerial and joint system
development aspects.
References
Agami, N., Saleh, M., & Rasmy, M. (2012). Hybrid dynamic framework for supply chain perform-
ance improvement. IEEE Systems Journal, 6(3), 469478.
Akyuz, G.A. (2011). Collaborative quality management in: Supply chain management: Pathways for
research and practice, InTech Open Access Publishing, August 2011, e-book chapter.
pp. 43 56. Editor: Dilek Onkal.
Akyuz, G.A., & Erkan, T.E. (2010). Supply chain performance measurement: A literature review.
International Journal of Production Research, 48(17), 51375155.
Akyuz, G.A., & Gursoy, G. (2010, November 45). Taxonomy of collaboration in supply chain man-
agement. Proceedings of VIII. International logistics and supply chain congress, Istanbul-
TURKEY (pp. 3144).
Akyuz, G.A., & Gursoy, G. (2011, October 27 29). Role and importance of Information technology
in supply chain collaboration (pp. 238 251). Proceedings of IX. International logistics &
supply chain congress. Izmir, Turkey. 2.
Akyuz, G.A., & Rehan, M. (2009). Requirements for forming an e-supply chain. International
Journal of Production Research, 47(12), 32653287.
Alfaro-Saiz, J., Rodrigez, R., & Verdecho, M. (2011). Performance management in collaborative
networks: Difficulties and barriers (pp. 133139). Adaptation and Value Creating
Collaborative Networks IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology,
Volume 362.
Arshinder, A.K., & Deshmukh, S.G. (2008). Supply chain coordination: Perspectives, empirical
studies and research directions. International Journal of Production Economics, 115(2),
316 335.
Balbastre-Benavent, F., & Canet-Giner, M.T. (2011). The strategy formation process in the EFQM
Excellence Model: A critical review and new perspectives. Total Quality Management &
Business Excellence, 22(7), 727 742.
Baldrige Publications. (2011). Is your organization strategic when considering supplier relation-
ships? Retrieved January 21, 2014, from http://www.nist.gov/baldrige/publications/archive/
insights_0211.cfm
Baldrige Publications. (2013). Baldrige criteria for excellence 20132014. Retrieved January 20,
2014, from http://www.nist.gov/baldrige/publications/upload/Category-and-Item-Comme
ntary_BNP.pdf
Batson, R.G., & McGough, K.D. (2007). A new direction in quality engineering: Supply chain
quality modeling. International Journal of Production Research, 45(23), 54555464.
Bendoly, E., & Jacobs, F.R. (2005). Strategic ERP: Extensions and use. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Beyerlein, M.M., McGee, C., Klein, G., Nemiro, J., & Broedling, L. (2003). The collaborative work-
systems fieldbook: Strategies, tools and techniques. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley.
Bouchbout, K., Akoka, J., & Alimazighi, Z. (2012). An MDA-based framework for collaborative
business process modelling. Business Process Management Journal, 18(6), 919 948.
Burton, R. (2013). Business excellence frameworks as the No.1 productivity improvement tool.
Articles and commentaries by Asian Productivity Organization. Retrieved January 18,
2014, from http://www.apo-tokyo.org/productivity/090_prod.htm
Burton, T.T., & Boeder, S.M. (2003). The lean extended enterprise: Moving beyond the four walls to
value stream excellence. Boca Raton, FL: Ross Publishing Series.
Busi, M., & Bititci, U.S. (2006). Collaborative performance management: Present gaps and
future research. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,
55(1), 7 25.
Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Bouche, X., & Afsharmanesh, H. (2010). Collaborative networks for a sus-
tainable world. Proceedings of the 11th IFPI WG 5.5 Working Conference on Virtual
Enterprise, PRO-VE 2010 St. Etienne, France, October 2010.
Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Oliveira, A.I., & Sesana, M. (2009). A Framework for computer-assisted
creation of dynamic virtual organisations. International Journal of Production Research,
47(17), 46614690.
Cardoso, J., & Aalst, W.V.D. (2009). Handbook of research on business process modeling.
Information science reference. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Chaabane, A., Ramudin, A., & Paquet, M. (2011). Designing supply chains with sustainability con-
siderations. Production Planning and Control, 22(8), 727741.
Christopher, M., & Peck, H. (2004). Building the resilient supply chain. International Journal of
Logistics Management, 15(2), 113.
Collicchia, C., Dallari, F., & Melacini, M. (2010). Increasing supply chain resilience in a global sour-
cing context. Production Planning and Control, 21(7), 680694.
Croom, S. (2007). Creating and managing value in supply networks. Supply Chain Management: An
International Journal, 12(5).
Crossan, M., Gandz, J., & Seitjz, G. (2010). Creating and managing value in supply networks.
Supply Chain Management Series (Vol. 12). Bradford: EMERALD Group Publishing.
Dodangeh, J., Rosnah, M.Y., Ismail, N., Md.Ismail, Y., Biekzadeh, M.R., & Jassbi, J. (2012). A
Review on major business excellence frameworks. Technics, Technologies Education
Management, 7(3), 13861392.
14 G.A. Akyuz
EFQM Model. (2013). EFQM Excellence Model 2013. Retrieved January 5, 2013, from http://
ebookbrowse.com/efqm-excellence-model-2013-en-extract-pdf-d428586739
Emmet, S., & Crocker, B. (2006). The relationship-driven supply chain; creating a culture of col-
laboration throughout the chain. Hampshire: Gower Publishing.
Ferreira, R.P., Silva, N.J., Strauhs, F.R., & Soares, A.L. (2011). Performance management in colla-
borative networks: A methodological proposal. Journal of Universal Computer Science,
17(10), 14121429.
Fitzpatrick, R.L. (2007). A literature review exploring values alignment as a proactive approach to
conflict management. Emerald Group. Retrieved December 5, 2011, from http://www.
minessence.net/intranet1/data/articles/ALiteratureReviewExploringValuesAlignment_000.pdf
Folan, P., & Browne, J. (2005). Development of an extended enterprise performance measurement
system. Production Planning and Control, 16(6), 531544.
Francisco, P.D., Azevedo, A., Bastos, J., & Almeida, A. (2011). Using key alignment indicators for
performance evaluation in collaborative networks (pp. 159166). Book chapter of:
Adaptation and Value Creating Collaborative Networks, IFIP Advances in Information and
Communication Technology. 362/2011. doi:10.1007/9783-642-23330-2_18
Genoulaz, V.B., Campagne, J.P., Llerena, D., & Pellegrin, C. (2010). Supply chain performance:
Collaboration, alignment and coordination. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Gilmore, D. (2011). The 10 dimensions of supply chain excellence. Supply chain digest, Sept. 16.
Retrieved January 10, 2013, from http://www.scdigest.com/assets/FirstThoughts/1109
16.php?cid=4961
Gordon, L.A., Loeb, M.P., & Tseng, C.Y. (2009). Enterprise risk management and firm performance:
A contingency perspective. Journal of Accounting Public Policy, 28(4), 301327.
Gunasekaran, A., Ngai, E.W.T., & McGaughey, R.E. (2006). Information technology and systems
justification: A review for research and application. European Journal of Operational
Research, 173(3), 957 983.
Guo, R. (2005). Cross-border resource management: Theory and practice. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Halldorsson, A., Kotzab, H., Mikkola, J.H., & Tage Skjtt-Larsen, T. (2007). Complementary
theories to supply chain management. Supply Chain Management: An International
Journal, 12(4), 284 296.
Hearnshaw, E.J.S., & Wilson, M.M.J. (2013). A complex network approach to supply chain network
theory. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 33(4), 442469.
Hofman, D., O Marah, K., & Elvy, C. (2011). The gartner supply chain top 25 for 2011. Gartner
Group. Retrieved March 10, 2013, from http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_
cd=213740#h-N66127
Hultman, K., & Gellerman, B. (2002). Balancing individual and organizational values: Walking the
tightrope to success. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Hung, S.J. (2011). An integrated system of activity-based quality optimisation and economic incen-
tive schemes for a global supply chain. International Journal of Production Research, 49(24),
7337 7359.
ibm.com. (2010). Working beyond borders: Insights from the global chief human resource officer
study. Retrieved January 20, 2014, from http://public.dhe.ibm.com/common/ssi/ecm/en/
gbe03353usen/GBE03353USEN.PDF
IT Governance Institute. (2005). Governance of the extended enterprise: Bridging business and IT
strategies. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley
Jafarnejad, A., & Shahaie, B. (2008). Evaluating and improving organisational agility. Delhi
Business Review, 9(1), 118.
Kanji, G.K. (2001). Forces of excellence in Kanjis Business Excellence Model. Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, 12(2), 259272.
Kanji, G.K., & Wong, A. (1999). Business excellence model for supply chain management. Total
Quality Management & Business Excellence, 10(8), 1147 1168.
Ketchen, D.J., & Hult, G.T.M. (2007). Bridging the organization theory and supply chain manage-
ment: The case of best value supply chains. Journal of Operations Management, 25(2),
573 580.
Korhonen, J.J. (2010). Anatomy of agile enterprises. Retrieved January 20, 2013, from http://www.
ebizq.net/blogs/agile_enterprise/2010/01/challenges-for-the-decade-part-3-leadership.php
Lee, H.L., & Whang, S. (2000). Information sharing in a supply chain. International Journal of
Technology Management, 20(34), 373 387.
Li, W.D. (2006). Integrated and collaborative product development environment, volume 2:
Technologies and implementations. Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific.
Liu, C., Li, Q., & Zhao, X. (2009). Challenges and opportunities in collaborative business process
management: Overview of recent advances and introduction to the special issue.
Information Systems Frontiers, 11, 201 209.
Loh, T.C., Koh, S.C.L., & Simpson, M. (2006). An investigation of the value of becoming an extended
enterprise. International Journal of computer integrated manufacturing, 19(1), 4958.
Looy, A.V., Backer, M.D., & Poels, G. (2011). Defining business process maturity: A journey
towards excellence. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 22(11), 11191137.
Lu, D. Betts, A., & Croom, S. (2011). Re-investigating business excellence: Values, measures and a
framework. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 22(12), 12631276.
Mann, R.S. (2011). Impact of business excellence/quality awards on enterprises. Tokyo: Asian
Productivity Organization.
Marks, E.A., & Lozano, B. (2010). Executives guide to cloud computing. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Mason-Jones, M., Naylor, B., & Towill, D. (2000). Lean, agile or leagile? Matching your supply
chain to the marketplace. International Journal of Production Research, 38(17), 40614070.
Mokhtar, A., Ab Hamid, M.R., Mustafa, Z., Husain, N., Idris, F., Suradi, N.R.M., & Ismail, W.R.
(2012). Value-based total performance excellence model: A conceptual framework for organ-
isations. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence. Special Issue: Excellence
Models, TQM and Performance, 23(5 6), 557572.
Munkvold, B.E. (2005). Experiences from global e-collaboration: Contextual influences on technol-
ogy adoption and use. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 48(1), 78 86.
Nagurney, A., & Nagurney, L.S. (2010). Sustainable supply chain network design: A multicriteria
perspective. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, 3(3), 189197.
Nightingale, D., & Srinivasan, J. (2011). Beyond the lean revolution: Achieving successful and sus-
tainable enterprise transformation. Saranac Lake, NY: AMACOM Books.
Obreja, C. (2008). The role of responsibility centers in the overall performance of the entity. The
Annals of The Stefan cel Mare University Suceava. Fascicle of the Faculty of Economics
and Public Administration No.8. Retrieved November 26, 2011, from http://seap.usv.ro/
annals/ojs/index.php/annals/article/viewFile/48/47
ODonnell, E. (2005). Enterprise risk management: A systems-thinking framework for event identi-
fication phase. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 6(3), 177195.
Oehmen, J., Ziegenbein, A., Alard, R., & Schonsleben, P. (2009). System-oriented supply chain risk
management. Production Planning & Control, 20(4), 343361.
Plenerty, G. (2007). Reinventing lean: Introducing lean management into the supply chain.
Burlington, VT: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Poirier, C.Q., & Morgan, F.S. (2009). Diagnosing greatness: Ten traits of the best supply chains.
Fort Lauderdale, FL: J. Ross.
Porter, L., & Tanner, S. (2004). Assessing business excellence: A guide to business excellence and
self-assessment. Oxford: Elsevier.
Rehan, M., & Akyuz, G.A. (2010). EAI (Enterprise Application Integration), SOA (Service Oriented
Architectures) and its relevance to e-supply chain formation. African Journal of Business
Management, 4(13), 26042614.
Robinson, C.J. & Malhotra, K.M. (2005). Defining the concept of supply chain quality management
and its relevance to academic and industrial practice. International Journal of Production
Economics, 96(3), 315 337.
Ross, D. (2003). Introduction to e-supply chain management. New York: St. Lucie Press.
Rudzki, R.A., Smock, D.A., Katzorke, M., & Stewart, JR., S. (2005). Straight to the bottom line: An
executives roadmap to world class supply management. Fort Lauderdale, FL: J. Ross.
Rudzki, R.A., & Trent, R.J. (2011). Next level supply management excellence: Your bottom line
roadmap. Fort Lauderdale, FL: J. Ross.
Sanders, N.D. (2007). An empirical study of the impact of e-business technologies on organisational
collaboration and performance. Journal of Operations Management, 25(6), 1332 1347.
Schneider, B., & Schneider, K. (2007). Aligning culture, strategy and leadership. Management
forum series. Retrieved November 11, 2011, from http://www.executiveforum.com/PDFs/
SchneiderSynopsis.pdf
Schuler, R.S., Jackson, S., & Luo, Y. (2004). Managing resources in cross-border Alliences.
London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
16 G.A. Akyuz
Sehgal, V. (2011). Supply chain as strategic asset: The key to reaching business goals. Hoboken,
NJ: Wiley.
Shacklett, M. (2011, August). A smarter supply chain: Can companies keep pace with the advance-
ments? World Trade 100 Magazine, 21 26.
Shaoshao, X.Y., Wu, J., Deng, C., & Li, P.G. (2006). A web-enabled quality management system.
Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 25(2), 95 107.
Silverstone, Y., Wallis, T., & Mindrum, C. (2012). Making cross-enterprise collaboration work.
Retrieved January 20, 2014, from http://www.accenture.com/us-en/outlook/Pages/outlook-
journal-2012-making-cross-enterprise-collaboration-work.aspx
Strauss, J.C., & Curry, J.R. (2002). Responsibility center management: Lessond from 25 years of
decentralised management. Washington, DC: NABUCO, National Association of College
and University Business Officers.
Swafford, P.M., Ghosh, S., & Murthy, N. (2008). Achieving supply chain agility through IT inte-
gration and flexibility. International Journal of Production Economics, 116(2), 288297.
Tang, O. & Musa, S.N. (2010). Identifying risk issues and research advancements in supply chain
risk management. International Journal of Production Economics, 133(1), 2534.
Tosti, D., & Jackson, S.F. (2003). Organisational alignment, iChangeWorld Consulting LLC.
Retrieved November 2011, from http://www.ichangeworld.com/docs/icwOA0303.pdf
Trappey, A.J.C., & Hsiao, D.W. (2008). Applying collaborative design and modularized assembly
for automotive ODM supply chain integration. Computers in Industry, 59(23), 277287.
Verdecho, M.J., Jose, A.J., & Rau, R.R. (2009). Foundations for collaborative performance measure-
ment. Production Planning and Control, 20(3), 193205.
Wang, L., Xie, H., Neelamkavil, J., & Perdasani, A. (2002). Collaborative conceptual design-state of
the art and future trends. Computer Aided Design, 34(13), 981996.
Wiebe, C. (2004). Evolving toward supply chain excellence. Retrieved March 15, 2013, from
http://www.teradata.com/resources/white-papers/Evolving-toward-Supply-Chain-Excellence-
eb3199/
Wilhelm, M. (2011). Managing Coopetition through horizontal supply chain relations: Linking
dyadic and network level analysis. Journal of Operations Management, 29(78), 663676.
Wong, A. (2001). Leadership for effective supply chain partnering. Total Quality Management and
Business Excellence, 12(7 8), 913 919.
Wong, A. (2003). Achieving supply chain management excellence. Total Quality Management,
14(2), 151 159.
www.bpir.com. Business excellence models. Retrieved January 20, 2014, from http://www.bpir.com/
total-quality-management-business-excellence-models-bpir.com.html
Xu, L.D. (2011). Information architecture for supply chain quality management. International
Journal of Production Research, 49(1), 183 198.
Zsidisin, G., & Ritchie, B. (2009). A handbook of assessment, management and performance.
New York: Springer Science+Business Media.

Quality Excellence in Complex Supply Networks - EFQM Excellence Model Reconsidered

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Quality Excellence in Complex Supply Networks - EFQM Excellence Model Reconsidered

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [UZH Hauptbibliothek / Zentralbibliothek Zrich]

On: 06 May 2015, At: 18:20

Total Quality Management & Business

Quality excellence in complex supply

Click for updates

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2014.929253

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Quality excellence in complex supply networks: EFQM excellence

Department of Industrial Engineering, Atilim University, Kizilcasar Mahallesi, 06836 Incek

# 2014 Taylor & Francis

2. Keys to collaborative supply network excellence

. sound strategy supported by solid leadership;

The repeated emphasis on the concepts of sound strategy, collaboration, strategic

. Stage 1 Reporting: SC reporting, dominated by pre-defined queries.

Figure 1. Evolving into a world class supply chain (Weibe, 2004).

. Stage 5 Active warehousing: Implementation, issue resolution with what-if scen-

Hence, Full Visibility, Integrity, Process Orchestration, Collaboration, Stra-

3. EFQM model in collaborative networks

Figure 2. EFQM components (www.efqm.org).

leadership, strategic planning, customer focus, workforce focus, process orientation,

Figure 3. Multi-partner EFQM representation.

. Assuring constancy of purpose at network level.

. Managing cross-border teams.

With these characteristics, leadership in an extended environment involves fresh opportu-

. Ensuring joint, effective sharing of human resource across borders.

. Ensuring cross-border involvement, empowerment, teamwork and commitment

3.4. Partnerships and resources

. Considering core competencies and strategic capabilities in relation to strategic

Inevitably, this extended collaboration scope requires sharing of information to ensure

3.5. Processes, products and services

. design of business processes, products and services;

W supplier relationship management;

W customer relationship management;

W performance and risk management;

W managerial control (on-line, real-time reporting, alerting and managerial action)

. reengineering of business processes, products and services.

Figure 4. RADAR systematic of EFQM (www.efqm.org).

assess-refine) systematic of the EFQM model, as given in Figure 4, has to be performed at

You might also like