ASQ has released its “Global State of Quality Research: Analysis, Trends, and Opportunities 2013” report which provides greater insight into the way organisations around the world govern, manage, measure and support the quality discipline.
“Analysis, Trends, and Opportunities 2013” is the second of three reports being released as part of the ASQ Global State of Quality Research.
“Analysis, Trends, and Opportunities” provides comparative data based on organization location, sector and size. The report expands on the data that was first presented in the “Global State of Quality Research: Discoveries 2013” report, which was unveiled at ASQ’s World Conference on Quality and Improvement in May.
The reports are based on data collected from 1991 organisations in 22 countries.
“ 'The Analysis, Trends, and Opportunities' report is a continuation of the high-level view of data presented in ‘Discoveries 2013,’” John Timmerman, chair of ASQ’s board of directors stated.
“This new report provides further context to the data and provides comparisons based on region, industry and company size.”
According to the report, smaller companies tend to share more product or service quality with customers than larger organisations.
Eighty-five percent of organisations with annual revenues of less than US$100 million work closely with customers on product performance compared with just 72.6 per cent of companies with revenues of more than US$10 billion, according to the report.
It went on to state that nearly 75 per cent of organisations with annual revenues of less than US$100 million share service or product quality performance with customers, whereas only 60 per cent of companies with more than US$10 billion in revenue share product or service quality performance with customers. According to the data, 67.3 per cent of all respondents share product or service quality with their customers.
Quality leaders: Cultural factors dictate transparency
Besides exploring the role between customers’ and organisations’ quality, the report also examines quality leadership at businesses by country.
Nearly 75 per cent of all organisations surveyed said their senior quality position reports directly to the CEO or equivalent.
The Czech Republic claims the highest percentage of senior quality positions that report to the CEO at 94.9 per cent, while Australia has the lowest at 58.6 per cent.
According to the results, all European countries rate higher than the average of 74.9 per cent,whereas the United States and the United Kingdom fall eight to nine percentage points below the average.
Like the statistic related to reporting standards, the Czech Republic also leads all countries in the availability of an organisation’s quality measures to all staff at 72.2 per cent.
The average of all respondents worldwide is 51 per cent. Slightly more than 47 per cent of U.S. respondents said their company makes its quality measures available to all staff.
Input from quality leaders and research advisors included in the new report suggest that cultural factors may dictate the comfort level associated with transparency.
Manufacturing, services organisations differ vastly
It also delves into differences by broad industry categories — comparing manufacturing and services organisations.
Of the three demographic characteristics explored in the report — company size, location and industry — industry has the most significant impact on the variability of quality practices.
The report shows manufacturing and services organizations apply and use quality practices differently.
In a previous benchmarking study conducted by ASQ and APQC, one of the most often-cited practices that had an impact on the quality culture and quality performance was daily access to quality measures for front line staff.
The report states that 46.4 per cent of manufacturing companies report quality measures to front line staff daily while 16.9 per cent of services organisations report quality measures to front line staff on the same frequency.
Furthermore, nearly 23 per cent of services organizations share no quality measure with front line staff, compared with less than 5 per cent of manufacturing organizations.