The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An Instrument for Measuring the Critical Factors of Quality Management
Abstract
Much has been written about how quality should be managed in an organization. The quality literature contains many case studies of successful companies and descriptions of quality concepts and quality improvement programs. To date, however, there has been no systematic attempt to organize and synthesize the various prescriptions offered, nor have measures of organizational quality management been proposed for areas such as top management leadership, training, employee involvement, and supplier management. While many organizations collect quality data such as defect rates, error rates, rework cost, and scrap cost, these are not measures of organization‐wide quality management. This paper provides a synthesis of the quality literature by identifying eight critical factors (areas) of quality management in a business unit. Operational measures of these factors are developed using data collected from 162 general managers and quality managers of 89 divisions of 20 companies. The measures can be used individually or in concert to produce a profile of organization‐wide quality practices. The measures are found to be both valid and reliable. Such measures could be used by decision makers in an organization to assess the status of quality management in order to direct improvements in the quality area. Researchers can use such measures to better understand quality management practice and to build theories and models that relate the critical factors of quality management to the organization's quality environment and quality performance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests
Cronbach, L. J. (1951) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02310555 · Cited by 43,931
Cited by
AIMQ: a methodology for information quality assessment
Lee, Y. W., Strong, D. M., Kahn, B. K., & Wang, R. Y. (2002) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/s0378-7206(02)00043-5 · Cited by 1,611
KANNAN, V (2005) · Omega · doi:10.1016/j.omega.2004.03.012 · Cited by 720
Identification of critical success factors, risks and opportunities of Industry 4.0 in SMEs
Moeuf, A., Lamouri, S., Pellerin, R., Tamayo-Giraldo, S., Tobon-Valencia, E., & Eburdy, R. (2020) · International Journal of Production Research · doi:10.1080/00207543.2019.1636323 · Cited by 515
Grover, P., Kar, A. K., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2022) · Annals of Operations Research · doi:10.1007/s10479-020-03683-9 · Cited by 419
Is production and operations management a discipline? A citation/co‐citation study
Pilkington, A., & Liston‐Heyes, C. (1999) · International Journal of Operations & Production Management · doi:10.1108/01443579910244188 · Cited by 188
Metadata
- Authors
- Saraph, J. V., Benson, P. G., & Schroeder, R. G.
- Venue
- Decision Sciences
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1989-12
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 810-829
- ISSN
- 0011-7315 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-5915
- OpenAlex
- W1975965087
- Cited by
- 2,030
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An Instrument for Measuring the Critical Factors of Quality Management. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1989.tb01421.x
- The paper
- Saraph, J. V., Benson, P. G., & Schroeder, R. G. (1989). An Instrument for Measuring the Critical Factors of Quality Management. Decision Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1989.tb01421.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.