Purpose

The purpose of this study is to find out the reasons why companies achieve different results in following different business excellence (BE) models. This has been done using a case study method, selecting to illustrate the actions taken and the results achieved by two role model companies, one following the Malcolm Baldrige model (MBM) and the other following the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) model.

Design/methodology/approach

The research design adopted is as follows: examine the literature of Total Quality Management (TQM) and BE, with specific reference to practices and happenings in Indian industry, to identify the key themes; analyse the research questions RQ1and RQ2 as mentioned above, using the learnings from the literature survey in a qualitative way. The analysis is done using chronological developments in TQM, BE and linking them with the happenings in Indian industry in a cause–effect way; develop a “source to sink” framework to track the various actions implemented by companies to drive BE in their quest to performance excellence, and to analyse the root causes for the success of the actions; illustrate the conclusions through two case studies, of two different companies from India, on the varied results achieved from following two different BE models, one, the MBM by Tata Steel, and, two, the EFQM by BHEL, both award-winning companies, for instilling “excellence” in performance; and develop a model to correlate the observations from the companies using two constructs, identifying latent variables and actions that have been taken to address the outcomes of the variables.

Findings

The findings show that the actions taken by the companies are different, under the two models. The reasons for these different actions have been described, and the impact of these on the latent variables and outcomes have been tracked. There are six reasons why the results are different.

Research limitations/implications

The study has highlighted the efforts by two role model companies. These are “comparisons of the best in the business” in their respective industries. However, one needs more studies to verify and establish whether the six reasons described are the ones which are most impactful. More companies need to be studied, and, based on the outcomes, one can establish the “best choice of the BE model” for Indian companies.

Practical implications

The results of the study show that using different BE models can affect the results. A non-optimal choice may lead to longer time and lower results.

Social implications

Excellent companies are sustainable, which means that they eliminate waste, operate in an environmentally friendly manner and address social issues. Speedily achieving excellence can lead to faster use of sustainable operations.

Originality/value

The work is original in the following ways: data collection through assessment teams; experience through personal engagement; identifying six reasons and two constructs which could lead to different results.

中文翻译：

---

采用PDCA方法对公司绩效的影响–印度公司的经验

目的

本研究的目的是找出公司遵循不同的业务卓越（BE）模型而获得不同结果的原因。这是通过案例研究方法完成的，选择来说明两家榜样公司采取的行动和取得的结果，一家遵循马尔科姆·鲍德里奇模型（MBM），另一家遵循欧洲质量管理基金会（EFQM）模型。

设计/方法/方法

所采用的研究设计如下：全面审查质量管理（TQM）和BE的文献，并特别参考印度工业的实践和情况，以识别关键主题；运用文献调查的定性分析方法，对上述研究问题RQ1和RQ2进行分析。该分析是使用TQM，BE中按时间顺序的发展进行的，并以因果关系将其与印度工业的发展联系起来。开发一个“沉没源”框架，以跟踪公司实施的各种行动，以推动BE追求卓越绩效，并分析行动成功的根本原因；通过对来自印度的两家不同公司的两个案例研究来说明结论，这些结论来自以下两种不同的BE模式所获得的不同结果：Tata Steel的MBM，以及两家BHEL的EFQM，这两家都是获奖公司，以灌输性能上的“卓越”；并使用两个结构开发模型以关联公司的观察结果，识别潜在变量和为解决变量结果而采取的措施。

发现

调查结果表明，在两种模式下，公司采取的行动是不同的。描述了采取这些不同措施的原因，并跟踪了这些措施对潜在变量和结果的影响。结果不同的六个原因。

研究局限/意义

该研究突出了两家榜样公司的努力。这些是各自行业中“最佳企业的比较”。但是，需要更多的研究来验证和确定所描述的六个原因是否是最有影响力的原因。需要研究更多的公司，然后根据结果，可以为印度公司建立“ BE模式的最佳选择”。

实际影响

研究结果表明，使用不同的BE模型可能会影响结果。非最佳选择可能会导致更长的时间和更低的结果。

社会影响

优秀的公司具有可持续性，这意味着它们可以消除浪费，以环保的方式运营并解决社会问题。迅速取得卓越成就可导致更快地使用可持续经营。

创意/价值

这项工作具有以下原始性：通过评估小组收集数据；通过个人参与获得经验；确定可能导致不同结果的六个原因和两个构造。