Organizational change in quality management aspects: a quantitative proposal for classification

Aquino, André Tavares de; Silva, Jéssica Larissa; Melo, Renata Maciel de; Silva, Maisa Medonça

doi:10.1590/0103-6513.216516

Brazil

home Table of contents navigate_before previous current next navigate_next

home Table of contents

Research Article • Prod. 27 • 2017 • https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6513.216516 linkcopy

Organizational change in quality management aspects: a quantitative proposal for classification

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

Periodically, organizations need to change the quality management aspects of processes and products in order to suit the demands of their internal and external (consumer and competitor market) environments. In the context of the present study, quality management changes involve tools, programs, methods, standards and procedures that can be applied. The purpose of this study is to help senior management to identify types of change and, consequently, determine how it should be correctly conducted within an organization. The methodology involves a classification model, with multicriteria support, and three organizational change ratings were adopted (the extremes, type I and type II, as confirmed in the literature, and the intermediary, proposed herein). The multicriteria method used was ELECTRE TRI and the model was applied to two companies of the Textile Local Productive Arrangement in Pernambuco, Brazil. The results are interesting and show the consistency and coherence of the proposed classification model.

Keywords
Change management; Total quality management; Multicriteria decision

Strengths	Example
Nature of the workforce	Greater diversity of culture; ageing population; immigration and increased outsourcing.
Technology	Faster, cheaper and portable computers; Appearance and growth of social networks (such as Facebook and Orkut); Deciphering the human genetic code.
Economic shocks	Sudden increase of taxes to fight inflation; the collapse of the international financial system; global recession.
Competition	Globalized competition; mergers and consolidations; increased government regulation of trade;
Social trends	Increasing global awareness; liberalization of attitudes toward gay, lesbian and transsexual employees; more tasks and multiple connectivity.
International policies	Anti-capitalist policies in Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador; opening markets in China; embargoes on Arab nations such as Iran and Iraq.

Authors	Type I change	Type II change
Weick & Quinn (1999)	Continuous Constant, cumulative and evolutionary change. It may be small changes, which occur daily throughout all the organization. Moreover, the accumulation of these changes can significantly change the organization.	Episodic It is a frequent, discontinuous and intentional change that occurs in divergent periods, when a company’s equilibrium is unstable.
Nadler et al. (1995)	Incremental/continuous Continuation of the existing standard. This may have different dimensions, but they are within the current context of the company.	Discontinuous Change of an existing pattern, which occurs in periods of imbalance and involves one or more of the characteristics of company restructuring.
Porras & Robertson (1992)	1st Order It is a linear and continuous change that involves alterations to the characteristics of the system, without breaking key aspects of the organization.	2nd Order It is a multi-dimensional, multi-level, radical and discontinuous change that involves breaking organizational paradigms.
Meyer et al. (1990)	1st Order Adaption: Focus on incremental change within the organization. Incrementalism as a mechanism.	2nd Order Metamorphosis: Focus on frame-breaking change within the organization. Life-cycle stage configuration transitions as a mechanism.
Mintzberg et al. (1998)	Microchange It is focused within the organization. Example: Redefinition of job positions in a factory or development of a new product.	Macrochange It affects the whole organization, including its relations with the environment. Example: Reposition in the marketplace or alteration of all its physical facilities.

Alternatives		Description
Traditional Quality Tools	Fluxogram	Graphic representation showing all steps of the process (Brassard, 1991).
	Checklist	Useful to register direct observations and help to gather facts about the process (Oakland, 1989).
	Pareto chart	A vertical bar chart that allows us to determine which problems to solve and determine the priority (Brassard, 1991).
	Control Chart	Monitoring a system in order to observe the existence of alterations to the expected average over time (Brassard, 1991).
	Histogram	It involves data measuring, revealing how much variation exists in any process (Brassard, 1991).
	Cause-and-effect diagram (also called Ishikawa or fishbone chart)	The relation between the “effect” and all possibilities of “cause” that may contribute to this effect (Brassard, 1991).
	Scatter plot	Study of the possible relation between two variables (Brassard, 1991).
Management and planning (MP) tools	Relation diagram	It shows many relevant factors in a situation or complex problem, indicating logical relations between the same factors by arrows (Moura, 1994).
	Affinity diagram	It groups together many sets of verbal data about a situation or problem by affinity or natural relation (Moura, 1994).
	Tree diagram	It shows the chaining of all secondary objectives and what is needed to achieve them (Moura, 1994).
	Prioritization matrix	It enables the establishment of a numerical order of priority for possible solutions, tasks or questions (Moura, 1994).
	Relation matrix	Multidimensional analysis, identifying the correlation level between two or more groups of factors (Moura, 1994).
	PDPC diagram	Exploration of possible ways and events, from an initial situation until a desired final situation (Moura, 1994).
	Activities diagram	It details the chaining of activities required to implement and monitor a plan (Moura, 1994).
Quality program	5S	The management and participative program that aims to create adequate work conditions for all people at all hierarchical levels of the organization.
	Quality Function Deployment QFD	Method that seeks to ensure that the final Project of a product or service meets the needs and desires of clients (Slack et al., 2009).
	Failure mode and effects analysis –FMEA	It identifies failures before they occur using a checklist. The goal is to identify what service/product characteristics are critical (Slack et al., 2009).
	Six Sigma	The improvement program created by Motorola aiming to eliminate defects and improve the productive process of a product or service (Slack et al., 2009).
Standard ISO	9001:2015	The ISO 9001:2015 entitled “Quality management systems – Requirements” specifies requirements for quality management systems when an organization needs to demonstrate its abilities or aims to enhance customer satisfaction.
Standard ISO	Set of support standards	These standards, called supporting standards, are important for an efficient and effective QMS. It is worth noting that the company will utilize and implement the supporting standards that best suit the needs and particularities of the company. These standards do not certify.

Criteria	Description/ theoretical basis	Assessments
G₁ - Implementation cost	The implementation cost of the change is a factor that affects changes related to equipment and people (Domingos & Neiva, 2014).	In thousands of reals (Brazilian currency).
G₂ - Commitment and attitude of the manager towards change	The manager's attitudes concerning the change affect the success of the organizational implementations (Nery & De-Farias, 2009).	Likert scale
		1 – No participation
		2 – Low participation
		3 – Indifferent
		4 – High participation
		5 - Total Participation
G₃ - Duration of implementation of the change	Duration to implement the change in the organization (Domingos & Neiva, 2014).	In months
G₄ - Level of organization impact	In every organization, there are planned and unplanned changes, all of which have consequences. Therefore, it is important to measure the impact of the change (Neiva & Paz, 2012).	Likert scale
		1 – None
		2 – Low
		3 – Indifferent
		4 – Reasonable
		5 – High
G₅ - Level of mobilization and involvement of the contributors.	Waterman’s (1994) position contends that meeting the needs and expectations of both external and internal (employees) customers is equally important to an organization that concerns itself with quality.	Likert scale
		1 – Up to 10% of the contributors.
		2 – Between 10% and 30% of the contributors.
		3 – Between 30% and 60% of the contributors.
		4 – Between 60% and 80% of the contributors.
		5 – Between 80% and 100% of the contributors.
G₆ - Level of resistance of the employees/ contributors.	Regardless of the type of change and its objectives, people usually do not welcome change (Bressan & Lima, 2001).	Likert scale
		1 – There is no resistance
		2 – Low level
		3 – Intermediate
		4 – High
		5 – Very high

G₇ - Given importance for hiring an external consultancy	According to Garvin (1988), it is necessary to invest time, resources, and money in search for quality, for many reasons, including environmental, safety, and competitive concerns. The quality improvement may be considered as a profitable target. Thus, the company needs to invest this time and resources in the selection and hiring of Accredited Certification Bodies (ACB), as well as consultancy and training services.	Likert scale
		1 – Low
		2 – Reasonable
		3 – Indifferent
		4 – High 5 – Extremely High

	G1	G2	G3	G4	G5	G6	G7
A1	9,000	2	6	3	1	3	2
A2	7,000	3	6	3	1	3	1
A3	15,000	4	8	2	5	3	3
A4	20,000	4	10	4	2	3	4
A5	100,000	5	18	5	3	3	5
A6	70,000	5	12	4	5	3	4
A7	3,000	3	5	2	1	2	1

Company A (small-sized company)	Company B (medium-sized company)
A1 – The 7 Traditional quality tools	A1 – The 7 Traditional quality tools
A2 – The 7 Management quality tools	A2 – The 7 Management quality tools
A3 – 5S	A3 – 5S
A4 – QFD	A4 – QFD
A5 – ISO 9001:2015 - Quality management systems - Requirements	A5 – Six sigma
A6 – Set of support standards: ISO 10014:2006 - Quality management -- Guidelines for realizing financial and economic benefits. ISO 10018:2012 - Quality management - Guidelines on people’s involvement and competence. ISO 10002:2014 – Customer satisfaction - Guidelines for complaints handling in organizations. ISO 10004:2012 - Customer satisfaction - Guidelines for monitoring and measuring. ISO 10015:1999 – Quality management – Guidelines for training.	A6 – ISO 9001:2015 - Quality management systems - Requirements
	A7 – Set of support standards: ISO 10014:2006 - Quality management -- Guidelines for realizing financial and economic benefits. ISO 10018:2012 - Quality management - Guidelines on people’s involvement and competence. ISO 10002:2014 – Customer satisfaction - Guidelines for complaints handling in organizations. ISO 10004:2012 - Customer satisfaction - Guidelines for monitoring and measuring. ISO 10015:1999 – Quality management – Guidelines for training.

Criteria	A	B
G1- Implementation cost	0.16	0.13
G2- Commitment and attitude of the manager towards change.	0.15	0.15
G3- Duration of the implementation of the change	0.12	0.12
G4- Level of organization impact	0.15	0.15
G5- Level of mobilization and involvement of the contributors.	0.15	0.15
G6- Level of resistance of the employees/ contributors.	0.15	0.15
G7- Given importance for hiring an external consultancy.	0.12	0.15

	G1	G2	G3	G4	G5	G6	G7
A1	5,000	2	4	3	4	3	3
A2	3,000	3	4	3	4	3	1
A3	10,000	4	4	3	4	3	3
A4	15,000	4	8	4	4	3	4
A5	40,000	5	12	5	5	3	4
A6	3,000	3	3	2	2	2	1

Criteria	Profile 1	Profile 2
G1	10,000	60,000
G2	2	4
G3	3 months	12 months
G4	2	4
G5	2	4
G6	2	4
G7	1	4

	Profile 1	Profile 2
C1	20,000	100,000
C2	2	4
C3	3 months	12 months
C4	2	4
C5	2	4
C6	2	4
C7	1	4

Criteria	Profile 1	Profile 2
G1	$p =$ 10,000 and $q =$ 5,000	$p =$ 10,000 and $q =$ 5,000
G2	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0
G3	$p =$ 6 and $q =$ 3	$p =$ 6 and $q =$ 3
G4	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0
G5	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0
G6	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0
G7	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0

	Profile 1	Profile 2
G1	$p =$ 15,000 and $q =$ 10,000	$p =$ 15,000 and $q =$ 10,000
G2	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0
G3	$p =$ 6 and $q =$ 3	$p =$ 6 and $q =$ 3
G4	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0
G5	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0
G6	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0
G7	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0	$p =$ 0 and $q =$ 0

Assignment by Alternative
Alternative	Pessimistic	Otimistic
A₁	C02	C02
A₂	C02	C02
A₃	C02	C02
A₄	C02	C02
A₅	C03	C02
A₆	C01	C01

Assignment by Alternative
Alternative	Pessimistic	Otimistic
A₁	C02	C02
A₂	C02	C02
A₃	C02	C02
A₄	C02	C02
A₅	C03	C03
A₆	C02	C02
A₇	C01	C01

vertical_align_top file_download show_chart

more_horiz close
- image
- translate
- link
- article
- vertical_align_top
- file_download
- show_chart
- image
- translate
- link
- article

location_on

Associação Brasileira de Engenharia de Produção CNPJ: 30.115.422/0001-73, Avenida Cassiano Ricardo, Nº 601, Residencial Aquarius, CEP: 12.246-870, http://portal.abepro.org.br/ - São José dos Campos - SP - Brazil
E-mail: production@editoracubo.com.br

rss_feed Stay informed of issues for this journal through your RSS reader

Accessibility / Report Error