품질경쟁력 우수기업 평가지표의 확인적 요인분석 (A Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Quality Competitiveness Excellence Company Evaluation Indicators)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국산업경영시스템학회
· 수록지 정보 : 한국산업경영시스템학회지 / 43권 / 3호 / 101 ~ 111페이지
· 저자명 : 박동준, 윤예분, 윤민

초록

Companies struggle to make their best products with high quality and service at a competitive price in global markets. However, customer needs and requirements keep changing with a variety of situations. Companies that face the changes can not stay the same and make an effort to adapt themselves to new circumstances. They would probably review the overall management system that is currently implementing to improve management efficiency. Among other things, quality might be considered to be a crucial element if they are manufacturing industries to be sustained in global markets. KSA (Korean Standards Association) is a government-affiliated organization under the Ministry of Trade, Infrastructure, and Energy. It is a Korean standards provider for quality and service industry. KSA confers national commendations for organizations, quality circles, artisans, QCEC (Quality Competitive Excellent Company), and the most honorable KNQA (Korean National Quality Award) every year. KSA established KNQA on the basis of Malcom Baldrige National Quality Award, Deming Prize, and European Quality Award. Research on quality awards shows that there are many similarities in the framework. Although KSA summarizes two factors for 13 evaluation indicators in the quality competitive excellent model of QCEC, the categorization is ambiguous to explain them according to earlier studies. We performed a deep analysis of foreign quality awards and background for KNQA and QCEC. We conducted a content analysis of KNQA and QCEC and matched evaluation items that were closely related. We proposed a quality competitiveness model with three factors, Technology, System, and Tools, summarizing 13 evaluation indicators in QCEC. Based on audit data for six years from 2012 to 2017 we carried out a confirmatory factor analysis for the proposed model by examining the model validity and fitness. Received 26 August 2020; Finally Revised 19 September 2020; Accepted 24 September 2020 †Corresponding Author : [e-mail]

영어초록

Companies struggle to make their best products with high quality and service at a competitive price in global markets. However, customer needs and requirements keep changing with a variety of situations. Companies that face the changes can not stay the same and make an effort to adapt themselves to new circumstances. They would probably review the overall management system that is currently implementing to improve management efficiency. Among other things, quality might be considered to be a crucial element if they are manufacturing industries to be sustained in global markets. KSA (Korean Standards Association) is a government-affiliated organization under the Ministry of Trade, Infrastructure, and Energy. It is a Korean standards provider for quality and service industry. KSA confers national commendations for organizations, quality circles, artisans, QCEC (Quality Competitive Excellent Company), and the most honorable KNQA (Korean National Quality Award) every year. KSA established KNQA on the basis of Malcom Baldrige National Quality Award, Deming Prize, and European Quality Award. Research on quality awards shows that there are many similarities in the framework. Although KSA summarizes two factors for 13 evaluation indicators in the quality competitive excellent model of QCEC, the categorization is ambiguous to explain them according to earlier studies. We performed a deep analysis of foreign quality awards and background for KNQA and QCEC. We conducted a content analysis of KNQA and QCEC and matched evaluation items that were closely related. We proposed a quality competitiveness model with three factors, Technology, System, and Tools, summarizing 13 evaluation indicators in QCEC. Based on audit data for six years from 2012 to 2017 we carried out a confirmatory factor analysis for the proposed model by examining the model validity and fitness. Received 26 August 2020; Finally Revised 19 September 2020; Accepted 24 September 2020 †Corresponding Author : [e-mail]

참고자료

· 없음