Article Critique: Sustaining Company Performance Through Partnering With Suppliers 1.

0 SUMMARY

The research paper is about the influence of soft factors on quality improvement and performance and the link between quality improvement and organizational performance. The populations of data are 683 of electrical and electronic firms in Malaysia and the sample are 255 respondents which response by managing directors and quality directors of the firm. Paper are develops regression and correlation analysis to test the relationships between soft factors, quality improvement and organizational performance. There are six predictor was proposed which are management commitment, customer focus, employee involvement, training and education, reward and recognition and supplier relationship. There are five predictors variable that show significant relationship between soft factors and quality improvement while there are only four predictors variable that significant relationship between soft factors and organizational

performance. The soft factors show very high positive significant influence on quality improvement and organizational performance. Thus, data are supported the hypothesis that soft factor positively related to organization (H1), soft factors positively related to the organizational performance (H2) and quality improvement was positively related to organizational performance (H3). Besides that, result of this paper can be used by managers to priories the implementation of the soft factors. For instance, those factors are found to have a positive impact on quality improvement practices and performance can be recommended to managers. So, they can allocate the resources to improve these factors to achieve higher organizational performance.

2.0

CRITIQUE

Based on the study done by Madi et al (2008), it said that soft factor is the influence to quality improvement and organizational performance. I partially agree with the statement saying that only six soft factors that used in that study which management commitment, customer focus, employee involvement, training and education, reward and recognition and supplier relationship while there are many of soft factors that can be measure by that study.

The other study that done by Lau and Idris, (2001), consists of eight elements of soft factors which are culture, trust, teamwork, employment continuity, top management leadership for quality and continuous improvement while there are three factors that similarly with the study that done by Madi et al. (2008) which employee involvement, training and education and customer focus. They can use the elements that done by Lau and Idris (2001) because it is related on the field of the research which is in Malaysia that will fit for application. It has considered the needs and limitation of Malaysian industries and facilitates TQM activities. The existing study was done in 2001 and by the new study that will done, it can made the comparison of the year that relating on Malaysia. So, in order to related on the significant of the relationship, the newly research can take more than three elements from the existing study.

Supplier relationship was excluded from the relationship of soft factors and quality improvement because it have no significant in explaining quality improvement while from the relationship between soft factors and organizational performance, three from six predictors are manage to be exclude which are training and education, reward and recognition and supplier relationship. So, from the both relationship between soft factors with quality improvement and organizational performance, supplier relationship is totally excluded from that relationship. Even though there are no significant in relationship of soft factors between quality improvement and organizational performance, but there are many studies that support the importance of supplier relationship with organization.

According to Wong, A. (2011) said that organizational performance can be sustained through partnering with suppliers. Monczka et al. (1998) found that satisfaction with partnership will lead to the success where the researchers found the successful supplier partnership is based on trust, interdependence, information quality, information sharing, information participation where the partners also involved in joint planning and also goal setting activities and joint problem solving efforts. When the companies do a partnership with their supplier, the information sharing can make both sides gain the trust. It has been proved by the Henriott (1999) where information sharing is requirement to build trust in partnership. In order to sustain company performance between buyer and supplier, it is not only depend on the buyer or company side but the supplier also needs to trust the buyer itself. Both side either supplier or buyer need to be driven by the levels of interpersonal trust to ensure that the trading and relationship among them were in a good condition. So, it will result to the customer satisfaction towards the company. Stephen et al (2010) in their study provide that suppliers need to reflect on the outcomes of trust and dependence with the company to gain better relationship with customers. A high level of trust can increase confidence and will sustain effective exchange. When both parties believe and trust each other, they will be willing to share confidential information and will support the growth of the relationship. It is supported by Patrik and Mosad (2003) that level of trust are critical degree of attaining satisfaction of the customer. It was considered that characteristic of trust have substantial influence on the relationship of customer satisfaction. They need to understand that without trust, buyers are very likely to terminate the relationship when the situation of dependence ends. The trustworthiness of supplier to the company will lead to the supplier to supply goods with a good quality and expected order that demanded by company to produce products. So, even there a lot of implication of the supplier relationship, it is consider not relevant to the study based on the insignificant relationship in influence of soft factors between organizational performance and quality improvement. In the research paper that entitled The Influence of Soft Factors on Quality Improvement and Performance: Perception from Managers does not give the definition of important word that could help readers to know briefly what the words means. It is

important to author to give the definition of the word and also can attract readers to read that research paper. The words that need to define are: Soft factor is non measurable and therefore subjective (Petra Wiklander,2010). Based on Claes Wohlin Magnus Ahlgren (2008) soft factors are used as a collective term for factors that are difficult to quantify exactly, i.e. non-technical aspects. The other definition of soft factors by Harald Svensson are non-technical activities that are hard to measure which is problematic when developing support for these activities, as improvements are achieved by collecting and analyzing process data.

There is no single definition of quality improvement, and no one approach appears to be more successful than another. However, there are a number of definitions that describe quality improvement as a systematic approach that uses specific techniques to improve quality. The most important ingredient in successful and sustained improvement is the way in which the change is introduced and implemented. One of the definitions of Quality Improvement is the systematic approach to reduction or elimination of waste, rework, and losses in production process. The ISO definition of quality

improvement states that it is the actions taken throughout the organization to increase the effectiveness of activities and processes to provide added benefits to both the organization and its customers. In simple terms, quality improvement is anything which causes a beneficial change in quality performance.

The conception of improvement finally reached as a result of the review was to define improvement as better organizations experience and outcomes achieved through changing provider behavior and organization through using a systematic change method and strategies. The key elements in this definition are the combination of a change which is improvement and combined with a method which an approach or specific tools to attain a superior outcome.

A high performance organization is an organization that achieves financial results that are better than those of its peer group over a longer period of time. Waal (2007). In other definition, it is strong financial results, satisfied customers and employees, high

levels of individual initiative, productivity and innovation, aligned performance measurement and reward systems, and strong leadership (Epstein, 2004).

Besides that, in term of population and sample, the researchers have done equally distributed the questionnaire to gain response from both categories of enterprises which 80 were classified as small firms, 86 firm as medium and 89 as large enterprises that totally to 255 out of 683 respondents. The researchers have drawn the sample survey through simple random sampling from the Federal Malaysian Manufacturers (FMM). According to Sekaran (2009), this sampling has the least bias and offers the most generalizability even the process could become cumbersome and expensive. So, it is good to the researchers to use simple random sampling method in order to get the respondents.

The manager need to imply and implementing of soft factors in improve the performance of the organizational performance. Managers need to play an important role in the entire firms quality improvement implementation due to many benefits that gain by the enduring that model. The findings done by Lau and Idris, (2001) soft foundation of the critical success factors on Total Quality Management implementation in Malaysia are useful for assisting organizations in the selection and targeting of TQM soft elements to specific problems and opportunities, providing organizations with better understanding of how TQM soft elements are likely to affect their organizations and encouraging the implementation of soft elements. In other study, Sudhakar (2011) stresses the soft factors affecting the software development team performance, such as team climate, support for innovation, team diversity, team conflicts, conflict management, team member competencies and characteristics, team leader behavior, and top management support. Otherwise, according to Strating and Nieboer (2009), the teams that have clear realistic team objective, and participate in collective decision making will achieve high standards of task performance, along with innovative ideas and working methods. The quest for creativity and innovation in products, services, systems and work processes results into long-term organizational survival and success (Mathisen et al., 2004)

3.0

CONCLUSION

As conclusion, there are partially agree on the research paper from six soft factors that used by Madi et al, 2008. There are some argument regarding on other research paper that not limited to only six soft factors that influence quality improvement and organizational performance which consists of management commitment, customer focus, employee involvement, training and education, reward and recognition and supplier relationship. The researcher also can stress more on other factors like in Lau and Idris, (2001) study that indicate culture, trust, teamwork, employment continuity, top management leadership for quality and continuous improvement while have similarity on other three other factor which are employee involvement, training and education and customer focus. The researcher can take partially from that eight elements. Supplier relationship is insignificant in that study even though there are many studies that support the importance of supplier relationship with organization. It been proof by other study done by Wong. A (2011), Monczka et al. (1988), Henriot (1999), Stephen et al. (2010) and Patrick and Mosad (2003). Otherwise, there are critique regarding on no definition that provided by researchers to the reader like soft factors, quality improvement and organizational performance. The population and sample have equally distributed the question to three types of firm by using simple random sampling. In order to gain quality improvement and organizational performance, managers need to use soft factors because it has many benefits by implementing it into the organizations.

4.0

REFERENCES

Alfred W., (2002),"Sustaining Company Performance Through Partnering With Suppliers", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 19 Iss: 5 pp. 567 580.

Andr A. de Waal, (2007),"The Characteristics of a High performance Organization", Business Strategy Series, Vol. 8 Iss: 3 pp. 179 185.

Chakrapani, C. (1988) How to Measure Service Quality & Customer Satisfaction. Technical Report. Epstein, M.J. (2004), The Drivers and Measures of Success in High Performance Organizations,nStudies in Managerial and Financial Accounting, Vol. 14, Elsevier, Amsterdam.

Goparaju P. S., Ayesha F., & Sanghamitra P., (2011),"Soft Factors Affecting the Performance of Software Development Teams", Team Performance Management, Vol. 17 Iss: 3 pp. 187 205.

Harald Svensson, A Framework for Improving Soft Factors in Software Development.

H.C. Lau, M.A. Idris, (2001),"The Soft Foundation of the Critical Success Factors on TQM Implementation in Malaysia", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 13 Iss: 1 pp. 51 62.

Henriott, L. (1999). Transforming supply chains into e-chains. Supply Chain Management Review--Global Supplement, January/February: 15-18. Keith O., Ron, Will G., & Robert G., (2001),"Creating and Sustaining the High

Performance Organization", Managing Service Quality, Vol. 11 Iss: 1 pp. 10 21.

Mathisen, G.E., Einarsen, S., Jrstad, K. and Brnnick, K.S. (2004), Climate for Work Group Creativity and Innovation: Norwegian Validation of the Team Climate Inventory (TCI), Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, Vol. 45 No. 5, pp. 383-92. Madi A., Jegak U., Juan J. T., (2008),"The influence of soft factors on quality Improvement and performance: Perceptions from managers", The TQM Journal, Vol. 20 Iss: 5 pp. 436 - 452 Monczka, R.M., K.J. Peterson, R.B. Handfield, & G.L. Ragatz (1998). Success factors in strategic supplier alliances: The buying company perspective. Decision Sciences, 29(3): 553-573. Petra Wiklander, (2010) Soft Factors in Real Estate Calculation

Patrick J. & Mosad Z., (2003), Achieving High Satisfaction in Supplier-Dealer Working Relationship, Vol. 8, No.3, Pp 224-240. Strating, M.M.H. and Nieboer, A.P. (2009), Psychometric test of the Team Climate Inventory short version investigated in Dutch quality improvement teams, BMC Health Services Research, Vol. 9, p. 126.

Stephen C. H., Zhizhong J & Peter N., (2011), Supplier Relationship Management in the Construction Industry : The Effects of Trust and Dependence, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp.3-15. http://www.transition-support.com/Quality_improvement.htm