References - link.springer.com3A978-3-7908-2690-6%2F1.pdfAnderson J, Gerbing DW (1988) Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological

References

Aaker DA (1989) Managing assets and skills. The key to a sustainable competitive advantage. California Management Review 3 I : 91-106

Adam EE (1994) Alternative quality improvement practices and organization performance.Journal of Operations Management 12: 27-44

Adam EE, Swamidass PM (1989) . Assessing operations management from a strategic perspective. Journal of Management 15: 181-203

Adler PS, Goldoftas B, Levine DI (1997) Ergonomics, employee involvement and the Toyota production system: A case study ofNUMMl's 1993 model introduction. Industrialand Labor Relations Review 50: 416-437

Ahire SL, Golhar DY, Waller MA (1996) Development and validation of TPM implementation constructs. Decision Sciences 27: 23-56

Aiken LS, West SG (1996) Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions.SAGE Publications , Newbury Park et al.

Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification . IEEE Transaction andAutomatic Control 19: 716-723

Amit R, Schoemaker PJH (1993) Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strategic Management Journal 14: 33-46

Anderson J, Gerbing DW (1988) Structural equation modeling in practice: A review andrecommended two-step approach . Psychological Bulletin 103: 411-423

Anderson JC, Cleveland G, Schroeder RG (1989) Operations strategy: A literature review.Journal of Operations Management 8: 133-158

Anderson JC, Gerbing DW, Hunter JE (1987) On the assessment of unidimensional measurement: Internal and external consistency and overall consistency criteria. Journal ofMarketing Research 24: 432-437

Andrews K (1971) The concept of corporate strategy. Dow Jones - Irwin, HomewoodAnsofflH (1965) Corporate strategy. McGraw-Hill, New YorkArmstrong, S, Overton T (1977) Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of

Marketing Research 14: 396-402Arrow KJ (1969) Classificatory notes on the production and transmission of technical

knowledge. American Economic Review 59: 29-35Backhaus K, Erichson B, Plinke W, Weiber R (2000) Multivariate Analysemethoden - Eine

anwendungsorientierte Einfiihrung. 9th edn. Springer, Berlin et al.Bagozzi RP (1979) The role of measurement in theory construction and hypothesis testing:

Toward a holistic model. In: Ferrell OC, Brown SW, Lamb CW (eds) Conceptual andtheoretical developments in marketing. American Marketing Association , Chicago,pp 15-32

Bagozzi RP (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables andmeasurement error: a comment. Journal of Marketing Research 18: 375-381

Bagozzi RP (1994) Structural equation models in marketing research: basic principles. In:Bagozzi (ed) Principles of Marketing Research. Blackwell, Cambridge, pp 317-386

178 References

Bagozzi RP, Baumgartner H (1994) The evaluation of structural equation models and hypothesis testing. In: Bagozzi (ed) Principles of Marketing Research. Blackwell, Cambridge, pp 386-422

Bagozzi RP, Fornell C, (1982) Theoretical concepts, measurements, and meaning. In: Fornell, C. (ed) A second generation of multivariate analysis: measurement and evaluation. Praeger, New York, pp 24-38

Bagozzi RP, Phillips L (1982) Representing and testing organizational theories : A holisticconstrual. Administrative Science Quarterly 27: 459-489

Bagozzi RP, Yi Y (1988) On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science 16: 74-94

Bagozzi RP, Yi Y (1991) Multitrait-multimethod matrices in consumer research. Journal ofConsumer Research 17: 426-439

Bagozzi RP, Yi Y, Phillips LW (1991) Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Administrative Science Quarterly 36: 421-458

Bain J (1956) Barriers to new competition . Harvard University Press, CambridgeBalderjahn I (1985) Strukturen sozialen Kundenbewul3tseins. Marketing Zeitschrift fur For

schung und Praxis 7: 253-262Balderjahn 1 (1986) Das umweltbewulste Konsumentenverhalten. Duncker und Humblot,

BerlinBamberger I, Wrona T (1996) Der Ressourcenansatz und seine Bedeutung flir die strategi

sche Unternehmensflihrung. Zeitschrift flir betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung 48: 130153

Barney 18 (I 986a) Strategic factor markets: expectations , luck and business strategy. Management Science 42: 1231-1241

Barney 18 (1986b) Types of competition and the theory of strategy: toward an integrativeframework. Academy of Management Review II : 791-800

Barney 18 (1986c) Organizational culture : can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage? Academy of Management Review II : 656-665

Barney 18 (1988) Returns to bidding firms in mergers and acquisitions : reconsidering therelatedness hypothesis . Strategic Management Journal 9: 71-78

Barney 18 (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage . Journal of Management 17: 99-120

Barney 18, Hoskisson RE (1989) Strategic groups: untested assertions and research proposals. Managerial and Decision Economics II : 187-198

Barney JB, Zajac EJ (1994) Competitive organizational behavior: toward an organizationally-based theory of competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal 15: 5-9

Becker TE, Cote JA (1994) Additive and multiplicative method effects in applied psychological research: an empirical assessment of three models. Journal of Management 20:625-641

Bentler P (1990) Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin 107:238-246

Bentler P, Bonett D (1980) Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures . Psychological Bulletin 3: 588-606

Bentler P, Chou C (1987) Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociological Methods &Research 16: 78-117

Best GS (1983) Human Capital. The University of Chicago Press, Midway reprint, ChicagoBest MH (1990) The new competition: institutions of industrial restructuring . Harvard Uni

versity Press, CambridgeBirchall DW, Tovstiga G (1999) The strategic potential of a firm's knowledge portfolio .

Journal of General Management 25: 1-16

References 179

Black JA, Boal KB (1994) Strategic resources: traits, configurations and paths to sustainable competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal 15: 131-148

Black SA, Porter LJ (1996) Identification of crit ical factors ofTPM. Decision Sciences 27:1-21

Bogaert I, Martens R, Van Cauwenbergh A (1994) Strategy as a situational puzzle: the fitof components. In: Hamel G, Heene A (eds) Competence-based competition. Wiley,Chichester et al. pp 57-76

Bogner W, Mahoney JT, Thomas H (1998) Paradigm shift: the parallel origin, evolution,and function of strategic group analysis within the resource-based view of the firm.Advances in Strategic Management 15: 63-100

Bogner WC, Thomas H (1994) Core competence and competitive advantage: A model andillustrative evidence from the pharmaceutical Industry . In: Hamel G, Heene A (eds)Competence-based competition. Wiley, Chichester et al. pp 111-148

Bogner W, Thomas H, McGee J (1996) A longitudinal study of the competitive positionsand entry paths of European firms in the U.S. pharmaceutical market. Strategic ManagementJournal 17: 85-107

Bollen KA (1994) Structural equations with latent variables. Wiley, New York et al.Bollen KA, Lennox R (1991) Conventional wisdom on measurement: a structural equation

perspective. Psychological Bulletin 110: 305-314Bowman EH (1974) . Epistemology, corporate strategy , and academe . Sloan Management

Review 15: 35-50Bozarth C, Edwards S (1997) The impact of market requirements focus and manufacturing

characteristics focus on plant performance. Journal of Operations Management 15:161-180

Bozdogan H (1987) Model selection and Akaike's information criterion (aic) : The generaltheory and its analytical extensions. Psychometrica 52: 345-370

Brockhoff K (1999) Forschung und Entwicklung, Planung und Kontrolle. 5th edn. Oldenbourg, Miinchen

Brown SL, Eisenhardt KM (1997) The art of continuous change: linking complexity theoryand time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations. Administrative ScienceQuarterly 42 : 1-34

Browne MW (1984) The decompo sition of multitrait-multimethod matrices . British Journalof Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 37: 1-21

Byrne BM (1998) Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS , and SIMPLIS .Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey

Byrne BM, Bazana PG (1996) Investigating the measurement of social and academic competencies for early/late preadolescents and adolescents: a multitrait-multimethodanalysis . Applied Measurement in Education 9: 113-132

Camp RC (1992) Benchmarking: the search for industry best practices that lead to superiorperformance. ASQC Quality Press, Milwaukee

Camp RC (1995) Business process benchmarking - finding and implementing best practices . ASQC Quality Press, Milwaukee

Campbell DT, Fiske OW (1959) Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitraitmultimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin 56: 81-105

Camuffo A, Volpato G (1996) Dynamic capabilities and manufacturing automation: organizational learning in the Italian manufacturing automotive industry . Industrial and Corporate Change 5: 128-152

Carmines EG, Zeller RA (1979) Reliability and validity assessment. SAGE Publications,Newbury Park et al.

Castanias R, Helfat C (1991) Managerial resources and rents . Journal of Management 17:155-171

180 References

Caves RE, Porter M (1977) From entry barriers to mobility barriers: conjectural decisionsand contrived deterrence to new competition . Quarterly Journal of Economics 91: 241262

Chamberlin E (1939) The theory of monopolistic competition . Harvard University Press,Cambridge

Chandler AD (1990) Scale and scope: the dynamics of industrial capitalism. The BelknapPress of Harvard University Press, Cambridge

Chatterjee S (1990) Excess resources, utilization costs, and mode of entry. Academy ofManagement Journal 33: 780-800

Chatterjee S, Wernerfelt B (1991) The link between resources and type of diversification:theory and evidence. Strategic Management Journal 12: 33-48

Chi TY (1994) Trading in strategic resources: necessary conditions , transaction cost problems, and choice of exchange structure. Strategic Management Journal 15: 271-290

Choi TY, Eboch K (1998) The TQM paradox: relations among TQM practices, plant performance, and customer satisfaction . Journal of Operations Management 17: 59-75

Christensen CM (2001) The past and future of competitive advantage . Sloan ManagementReview, Winter: 105-109

Churchill GA (1989) A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs .Journal of Marketing Research 16: 64-73

Churchill GA (1991) Marketing research, methodological foundations. 5th edn. The DrydenPress, Chicago

Churchill GA (1992) Better measurement practices are critical of better understanding ofsales management issues. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 12: 73-80

Clark KB (1989) Project scope and project performance : the effect of parts strategy andsupplier involvement on product development. Management Science 35: 1247-1263

Cleveland G, Schroeder R, Anderson J (1989) A theory of production competence. Decision Sciences 20: 655-668

Coase RH (1937) The nature of the firm. Economica 4: 331-351Coates TT, McDermott CM (2002) An exploratory analysis of new competencies : a re

source based view perspective . Journal of Operations Management 20: 435-450Cockburn 1M, Henderson RM, Stem S (2000) Untangling the origins of competitive advan

tage. Strategic Management Journal 21: 1123-1145Collis OJ (1991) A resource-based analysis of global competition : the case of the bearings

industry. Strategic Management Journal 12: 49-68Collis OJ, Montgomery C (1995) Competing on resources: strategy in the 1990s. Harvard

Business Review, July-August: 118-128Combs JG, Ketchen OJ Jr (1999) Explaining interfirm cooperation and performance : to

ward a reconciliation of predictions from the resource-based and organizational economics. Strategic Management Journal 20: 867-888

Conner KR (1991) A historical comparison of resource based theory and five schools ofthought within industrial organization economics: do we have a new theory of thefirm? Journal of Management 17: 121-154

Conner KR, Prahalad CK (1996) A resource-based theory of the firm: knowledge versusopportunism. Organization Science 7: 477-501

Conway JM (1996) Analysis and design of multitrait-multirater performance appraisal studies. Journal of Management 22: 139-162

Corbett C, Van Wassenhove LN (1993) Trade-offs? What trade-offs? Competence andcompetitiveness in manufacturing strategy. California Management Review 35: 107122

Cortina JM (1993) What is coefficient alpha? An examinat ion of theory and applications .Journal ofApplied Psychology 78: 98-104

References 181

Cote JA, Buckley MR (1987) Estimating trait, method, and error variance: generalizingacross 70 construct validation studies. Journal of Marketing Research 24: 315-318

Covin JG, Miles MP (1999) Corporate entrepreneurship and the pursuit of competitive advantage. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 23: 47-63

Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrica 12:1-16

Cronbach LJ (1987) Statistical tests for moderator variables: flaws in analysis recently proposed. Psychological Bulletin 102: 414-417

Cua KO, McKone KE, Schroeder RG (200 I) Relationship between implementation ofTQM; JIT, and TPM and manufacturing performance. Journal of Operations Manage ment 19: 675-694

Das A, Narasimhan R (2001) Process technology fit and its implications for manufacturingperformance. Journal of Operations Management 19: 521-540

D'Aveni RA, Gunther R (1994) Hypercompetition. The Free Press, New YorkDay GS (1984) Strategic market planning : the pursuit of competitive advantage. West Pub

lishing Company, St. PaulDay GS (1994) The capabilit ies of market-driven organizations. Journal of Marketing 58:

37-52Day GS Wensley, R: (1988) Assessing advantage : a framework for diagnosing competitive

superiority . Journal of Marketing 52: 1-20De Gregori TR (1987) Resources are not; they become; an institutional theory. Journal of

Economic Issues 21: 1241-1263De Groote X, Loch CH, Van Der Heyden L, Van Wassenhove LN, Yucesan E (1996)

Measuring management quality in the factory. European Management Journal 14: 540554

De Meyer A, Ferdows K (1990) Influence of manufacturing improvement programs on performance. International Journal of Operations and Production Management 10: 120131

De Meyer A, Nakane J, Miller JG, Ferdows K (1989) Flexibility : the next competitive battle - the manufacturing futures survey. Strategic Management Journal 10: 135-144

Deeds DL, DeCarolis D, Coombs J (2000) Dynamic capabilities and new product development in high technology ventures: An empirical analysis of new biotechnology firms.Journal of Business Venturing 15: 211-230

Dierickx I, Cool K (1989) . Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Science 35: 1504-1511

Dougherty D, Borrelli L, Munir K, and O'Sullivan A (1998) The interpretive flexibility ofan organization's technology as a dynamic capability . Advances in strategic management 15: 169-204

Droge C, Vickery SK, Markland RE (1994) Sources and outcomes of competitive advantage: an exploratory study in the furniture industry. Decision Sciences 25: 669-699

DuBois FL, Toyne B, OliffMD (1993) International manufacturing strategy of U.S. multinationals : a concept framework based on a four-industry study. Journal ofInternationalBusiness Studies 24: 307-333

Dutta S, Narasimhan 0, Rajiv S (1999) Success in high-technology markets: is marketingcapability critical? Marketing Science 18: 547-568

Eisenhardt KM, Martin JA (2000) Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strategic ManagementJoumal 21: 1105-1122

Eisenhardt KM, Sull DN (2001) Strategy as simple rules. Harvard Business Review, January: 107-116

Ernst H (2001) Erfolgsfaktoren neuer Produkte - Grundlagen flir eine valide empirischeForschung. DUV, Gabler, Wiesbaden

182 References

Fahy J (2000) The resource-based view of the firm. Journal of European Industrial Training24: 94-104

Ferdows K, De Meyer A (1990) Lasting improvements in manufacturing performance: insearch of a new theory. Journal of Operations Management 9: 168-184

Fine CH (1986) Quality improvements and learning in productive systems. ManagementScience 32: 1301-1315

Fine CH (1998) Clockspeed. Perseus Books, Reading,Fine CH, Hax AC (1985) Manufacturing strategy: a methodology and an illustration. Inter

faces 15: 28-46Fiol CM (I 99 I) Managing culture as a competitive resource : an identity-based view of sus

tainable competitive advantage. Journal of Management 17: 191-211Fiske DW (1982) Convergent-discriminant validation in measurements and research strate

gies. In: Brinberg D, Kidder LH (eds) Forms of validity in research . Jossey-Bass, SanFrancisco, pp 77-92

Flynn BB, Saladin B (2001) Further evidence on the validity of the theoretical models underlying the Baldrige criteria. Journal of Operations Management 19: 617-652

Flynn BB, Schroeder RG, Flynn EA (1999) World class manufacturing: an investigation ofHayes and Wheelwright's foundation. Journal of Operations Management 17: 249-269

Flynn BB, Schroeder RG, Sakakibara S (1994) A framework for quality management (research) and an associated measurement instrument. Journal of Operations Management11: 339-366

Fornell C (1982) A second generation of multivariate analysis - an overview. In: Fornell C(ed) A second generation of multivariate analysis : measurement and evaluation . Praeger, New York, pp 1-21

Fornell C, Larcker D (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research 18: 39-50

Forster F, Fritz W, Silberer G, Raffee H (1984) Der LISREL-Ansatz der Kausalanalyse undseine Bedeutung fUr die Marketing-forschung. Zeitschrift fUr Betriebswirtschaft 54:346-367

Foss N (1996) Research in strategy, economies, and Micheal Porter. Journal of Management Studies 33: 1-24

Fritz W (1992) Marktorientierte UnternehmensfUhrung und Unternehmenserfolg. SchafferPoeschel, Stuttgart

Fritz W (1995) Marketing-Management als Unternehmenserfolg . Schaffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart

Frohlich MT, Dixon JR (2001) A taxonomy of manufacturing strategies revisited. Journalof Operations Management 19: 541-558

Gale BT (1972) Market share and rate of return: review of economics and statistics 54: 412423

Garvin D (1988) Managing Quality. The Free Press, New YorkGerbing DW, Anderson JC (1988) An updated paradigm for scale development incorporat

ing unidimensionality and its assessment. Journal of Marketing Research 25: 186-192Gerbing DW, Hamilton JG, Freeman EB (1994) A large-scale second-order structural equa

tion model of the influence of management participation on organizational planningbenefits. Journal of Management 20 859-885

Gerstein M, Reismann H (1983) Strategic selection : matching executives to business conditions. Sloan Management Review 24: 33-49

Ghemawat P (1986) Sustainable advantage. Harvard Business Review 64: 53-58Grant RM (1991) A resource based theory of competitive advantage: implications for strat

egy formulation. California Management Review 33: 114-135

References 183

Grant RM (1996) Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic ManagementJournal 17: 109-122

Greene PG, Brush CG, Hart MM (1999) The corporate venture champion: A resourcebased approach to role and process. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Spring :103-122

Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black, WC (1998) Multivariate data analysis . PrenticeHalI, Englewood Cliffs

HalI R (1992) The strategic analysis of intangible resources . Strategic Management Journal13: 135-144

HalI R (1993) A framework linking intangible resource s and capabilities to sustainablecompetitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal 14: 607-618

HalI R (1994) A framework for identifying the intangible sources of sustainable competitive advantage. In: Hamel G, Heene A (eds) Competence-based competition. Wiley,Chichester et aI., pp 149-170

Hamel G (1994) The concept of core competence. In: Hamel G, Heene A (eds) Competence-based Competition. Wiley, Chichester et al. pp 11-34

Hamel G, Prahalad CK (1989) Strategic intent. Harvard Business Review, May-June : 63-76Hamel G, Prahalad CK (1993) Strategy as stretch and leverage. Harvard Business Review,

March-April: 75-84Hamilton RD III, Eski ED, Michaels MP (1998) Assessing competitors: The gap between

strategic intent and core capability . Long Range Planning 31: 406-417Hannan MT, Freeman J (1977) The population ecology of organizations. American Journal

of Sociology 82: 929-964Hansen GS, Wernerfelt B (1989) Determinants of firm performance: the relative impor

tance of economic and organisational factors. Strategic Management Journal 10: 399411

Hartley J, Zirger BJ, Kamath R (1997) Managing the buyer-supplier interface for on-timeperformance in product development. Journal of Operations Management 15: 57-70

Hartmann FGH, Moers F (1999) Testing contingency hypotheses in budgetary research : anevaluation of the use of moderated analysis . Accounting, Organizations and Society24: 291-315

Hartung J, Elpelt B (1989) Multivariate Statistik. 3'd edn. Oldenbourg Verlag, MiinchenHauschildt J (1993) Innovationsmanagement - Determinanten des Innovationserfolges. In:

Hauschildt J, Grnn 0 (eds) Ergebnisse empirischer betriebswirtschaftlicher Forschung:Zu einer Realtheorie der Unternehmung. Schaffer-Poeschel. Stuttgart, pp 295-326

Hayek F (1989) The pretence of knowledge : 1974 Nobel memorial lecture. reprinted in theAmerican Economic review 79: 3-7

Hayes RH, Pisano GP (1994) Beyond world-class: the new manufacturing strategy . Harvard Business Review, January - February: 77-86

Hayes RH, Pisano GP (1996) Manufacturing strategy : at the intersection of two paradigmshifts. Production and Operations Management 5: 25-41

Hayes RH, Wheelwright SC (1984) Restoring our competitive edge: competing throughmanufacturing. Wiley, New York et al.

Hayes RH, Wheelwright SC (1985) Link manufacturing process and product life cycles.Harvard Business Review, January-February: 135-140

Hayes RH, Wheelwright SC, Clark KB (1988) Dynamic manufacturing: creating the learning organization . The Free Press, New York

Heeler R, Ray M (1972) Measure validation in marketing. Journal of Marketing Research9: 361-370

Henderson R, Cockburn I (1994) Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research . Strategic Management Journal 15: 63-84

184 References

Hildebrandt L (1984) Kausalanalytische Validierung in der Marketingforschung. MarketingZFP 6: 41-51

Hildebrandt L (1998) Kausalanalytische Validierung in der Marketingforschung. In: Hildebrandt L, Homburg C (eds) Die Kausalanalyse. Ein Instrument der empirischen betriebswirtschaftlichen Forschung. Schaffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart, pp 86-115

Hill T (1989) Manufacturing strategy. R.D. Irwin, HomewoodHofer CW, Schendel D (1978) Strategic formulation : analytical concepts. West Publishing

Company, St. Paul, MNHomburg C (1989) Exploratorische Ansatze der Kausalanalyse als Instrument der Marke

tingplanung. Lang, Frankfurt a. M.Homburg C (1995) Kundennahe von lndustrieguterunternehrnen: Konzeption, Erfolgsaus

wirkungen , Determinanten. Gabler, WiesbadenHomburg C, Baumgartner H (1995a) Die Kausalanalyse als Instrument der Marketingfor

schung, eine Bestandsaufnahme. Zeitschrift fur Betriebswirtschaft 65: 1091-1108Homburg C, Baumgartner H (I995b) Beurteilung von Kausalmodellen, Bestandsaufnahme

und Anwendungsempfehlungen. Marketing - Zeitschrift fur Forschung und Praxis 17:162-176

Homburg C, Dobratz A (1992) Covariance structure analysis via specification searches .Statistical Papers 33: 119-142

Homburg C, Giering A (1996) Konzeptualisierung und Operationalisierung komplexerKonstrukte . Marketing - Zeitschrift fllr Forschung und Praxis 18: 5-24

Homburg C, Giering A (1998) Konzeptualisierung und Operationalisierung komplexerKonstrukte - Ein Leitfaden fur die Marketingforschung. In: Hildebrandt L, Homburg C(eds) Die Kausalanalyse. Ein Instrument der empirischen betriebswirtschaftlichen Forschung . Schaffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart, pp 111-148

Homburg C, Krohmer H, Workman Jr JP (1999) Strategic consensus and performance: therole of strategy type and market-related dynamism . Strategic Management Journal 20:339-357

Homburg C, Ptlesser C (1999) Konfirmatorische Faktorenanalyse. In: Herrmann A, Homburg C (eds) Marktforschung. Gabler, Wiesbaden , pp 415-437

Hooley OJ, Moller K, Broderick AJ (1998) Competitive positioning and the resource basedview of the firm. Journal of Strategic Marketing 6: 97-115

Hunt SD (1995) The resource-advantage theory of competition: toward explaining productivity and economic grow. Journal of Management Inquiry 4: 317-332

HUttner M (1995) Faktorenanalyse. In: Tietz B, Kohler R, Zentes J (eds) Handworterbuchdes Marketing. 2nd edn. Schaeffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart , pp 678-689

HUttner M, Schwarting U (1999) Exploratorische Faktorenanalyse. In: Herrmann A, Homburg C, (eds) Marktforschung. Gabler, Wiesbaden, pp 383-412

Iansiti M, Clark KB (1994) Integration and dynamic capability: evidence from product development in automobiles and mainframe computers. Industrial and Corporate Change3: 557-605

Itami H, Roehl T (1987) Mobilizing invisible assets. Harvard University Press, CambridgeIttner CD, Larcker DF (1997) The performance effects of process management techniques.

Management Science 43: 522-534Jaccard J, Turrisi R, Wan CK (1990) Interaction effects in multiple regression . SAGE Pub

lications , Newbury Park et al.Jacoby J (1978) Consumer research : how valid and useful are all our consumer behavior re

search findings? A state of the art review. Journal of Marketing 42: 87-96Jain D (1994) Regression analysis for marketing decisions. in: Bagozzi (ed) Principles of

Marketing Research. Blackwell , Cambridge, pp 162-194

References 185

Jaworski BJ, Kohli AK (1993) Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences. Journalof Marketing 57: 53-70

Jayaram J, Droge C, Vickery S (1999) The impact of human resource management practices on manufacturing performance. Journal of Operations Management 18: 1-20

Johnson HT (1990) Performance measurement for competitive excel1ence. In: Kaplan RS(ed) Measures for Manufacturing Excel1ence. Harvard Business School Press, Boston ,pp 63-90

Joreskog K (1966) Testing a simple structure hypothesis in factor analysis . Psychometrica31: 165-178

Joreskog K (1967) Some contributions to maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrica 32: 443-482

Joreskog K (1969) A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrica 34, 182-202

Joreskog K (1974) Analyzing psychological data by structural analysis of covariance matrices. In: Atkinson RC, Krantz DH, Luce RD, Suppes P (eds) Contemporary developments in mathematical psychology. W.H. Freeman, San Francisco , pp 1-56

Joreskog K (1977) Structural equation models in the social sciences : specification, estimation, and testing . in: Krishnaiah, P.R. (ed) Applications of Statistics. North-HollandPublishing Co., Amsterdam, pp 265-287

Joreskog K, Sorbom D (1982) Recent developments in structural equation modeling. Journal of Marketing Research 19: 404-416

Joreskog K, Sorbom D (1989) LISREL 7 - A guide to the program and applications. 2nd

edn. SPSS, ChicagoJoreskog K, Sorbom D (1993) LISREL 8: user's reference guide . Scientific Software,

MooresvilleKaiser H (1974) An index offactorial simplicity. Psychometrica 39: 31-36Kathuria R (2000) Competitive priorities and managerial performance: a taxonomy of smal1

manufacturers. Journal of Operations Management 18: 627-641Katz RL (1974) Skills of an effective administrator. Harvard Business Review 52: 90-102Kenny DA (1976) An empirical application of confirmatory factor analysis to the multi

trait-multimethod matrix. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 12: 247-252Kenny DA, Kashy DA (1992) Analysis of the multitrait-rnultimethod matrix by confirma

tory factor analysis . Psychological Bul1etin 112: 165-172Kim C, Lee H (1997) Development of family triadic measures for children's purchase influ

ence . Journal ofMarketing Research 34: 307-321Kim Y, Lee J (1993) Manufacturing strategy and production systems: an integrated frame

work. Journal of Operations Management II : 3-15King AW, Zeithaml CP (200 I) Competencies and firm performance: examining the causal

ambiguity paradox . Strategic Management Journal 22: 75-99Klavans R. (1994) The measurement of a competitor's core competence. In: Hamel G,

Heene A (eds) Competence-based competition. Wiley, Chichester et aI., pp 171-182Klein JA, Hiscocks PG (1994) Competence-based competition: a practical toolkit. In:

Hamel G, Heene A (eds) Competence-based competition. Wiley, Chichester et aI.,pp 183-212

Knyphausen zu, D (1993) Why are firms different? Betriebswirtschaftslehre 53: 771-792Kotha S, Orne D (1989) Generic manufacturing strategies: a conceptual synthes is. Strategic

Management Journal 10: 211-231Krajewski LJ, Ritzman LP (1993) Operations management: strategy and analysis. Addison

Wesley Publishing, ReadingKruger W, Homp C (1997) Kernkornpetenz-Management: Steigerung von Flexibilitat und

Schlagkraft im Wettbewerb. Gabler, Wiesbaden

186 References

Kumar A, Dillon WR (1992) An integrative look at the use of additive and multiplicativecovariance structure models in the analysis of MTMM data. Journal of Marketing Research 29: 51-64

Kvanli AH, Guynes CS, Pavur RJ (1996) Introduction to business statistics . 4th edn. WestPublishing Company, New York

Lado AA, Boyd BG, Wright P (1992) A competency-based model of sustainable competitive advantage: toward a conceptual integration . Journal of Management 18: 77-91

Lado AA, Wilson MC (1994) Human resource systems and sustainable competitive advantage: a competency-based perspective. Academy of Management Review 19: 699-727

Learned EP, Christensen CR, Andrews KR, Guth WD (1969). Business policy: text andcases. R.D. Irwin, Homewood

Leonard-Barton 0 (1992) Core capabilities and core rigidities: a paradox in managing newproduct development. Strategic Management Journal 13: 111-125

Leong GK, Snyder DL, Ward PT (1990) Research in the process and content of manufacturing strategy. OMEGA 18: 109-122

Lippman S, Rumelt R (1982) Uncertain imitability: an analysis of interfirm differences inefficiency under competition. Bell Journal of Economics 13: 418-438

Loch CH, De Meyer A, Van der Heyden L, Van Wassenhove LN (1998) Management quality, continuous improvement and growth in the factory. INSEAD Working Paper,March

Loch CH, Van der Heyden L, Van Wassenhove LN, Huchzermeier A, Escalle C (2003) Industrial excellence. management quality in manufacturing. Springer, Berlin et al.

Long C, Vickers-Koch M (1995) Using core capabilities to create competitive advantage.Organizational Dynamics, Summer: 7-22

Long SJ (1983) Covariance Structure Models, an Introduction to LlSREL. SAGE Publications, Newbury Park et al.

Machlup F (1967) . Theories of the firm: marginalist, behavioral , managerial. AmericanEconomic Review 57: 201-220

Mahoney J (1995) The management of resources and the resources of management. Journalof Business Research 33: 91-101

Mahoney JT, Pandian JR (1992) The resource based view within the conversation of strategic management. Strategic Management Journal 13: 363-380

Maijoor S, Van Witteloostuijn A (1996) An empirical test of the resource-based theory:Strategic regulation in the Dutch audit industry . Strategic Management Journal 17:549-569

Makadok R (2001) Toward a synthesis of the resource-based and dynamic-capability viewof rent creation . Strategic Management Journal 22: 387-401

Malhorta N (1993) Marketing research - an applied orientation. Prentice Hall, EnglewoodCliffs

Mancke R (1974) Causes of interfirm profitability differences : a new interpretation of theevidence. Quarterly Journal of Economics 88: 181-193

Mann HM (1966) Seller concentration, barriers to entry, and rates of return in thirty industries, 1950-1960. Review of Economics and Statistics 48: 296-307

Marris R (1966) The economic theory of managerial eapitalism . Macmillan, LondonMarsh HW (1989) Confirmatory factor analysis of multitrait-multi method data: many prob

lems and a few solutions. Applied psychological measurement 13: 335-361Marsh HW, Bailey M (1991) Confirmatory factor analysis of multitrait-multimethod data: a

comparison of alternative models . Applied psychological measurement 15: 47-70Marsh HW, Grayson 0 (1995) Latent variable models of multitra it-multimethod data. In

Hoyle RH (ed) Structural equation modeling: concepts, issues, and applications. Sage,Thousand Oaks, pp 177-198

References 187

Marsh HW, Hocevar 0 (1988) A new, more powerful approach of multitrait-multimethodanalyses: application of second-order confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of AppliedPsychology 73: 107-117

Mason CH, Perreault WD (1991) Collinearity, power, and interpretation of multiple regres sion analysis. Journal ofMarketing Research 28 : 268-280

Mason ES (1939) Price and production policies of large-scale enterprises. American Economic Review 29: 61-74

McGrath RG, Macmillan IC, Venkatarman S (1995) Defining and developing competence:a strategic process paradigm. Strategic Management Journal 16: 251-275

McGuinness T, Morgan RE (2000) Strategy, dynamic capabilities and complex science:management rhetoric vs. reality. Strategic Change 9: 209-220

McLeod R (1995) Systems theory and information resources management: integrating keyconcepts. Information Resources Management Journal 8: 5-14

Mehra A (1996) Resource and market based determinants of performance in the U.S. banking industry. Strategic Management Journal 17: 307-322

Menor LJ, Roth AV, Mason CH (2001) Agility in retail banking: a numerical taxonomy ofstrategic service groups. Management Science 3: 273-292

Meyer SM, Collier DA (200 I) An empirical test of the causal relationship in the Baldrigehealth care pilot criteria. Journal of Operations Management 19: 403-425

Miller JG, Roth A (1994) A taxonomy of manufacturing strategies. Management Science40: 285-304

Miller JG, De Meyer A, Nakane J (1992) Benchmarking global manufacturing. BusinessOne Irwin , Homewood

Miller S, Rogers 0 (1956) Manufacturing policy . Irwin, HomewoodMoingeon B, Ramanantsoa B, Metais E, Orton JD (1998) Another look at strategy-structure

relationships: the resource-based view. European Management Journal 16: 297-305Montgomery CA, Harihan S (1991) Diversified entry by established firms . Journal ofEco

nomic Behavior and Organisation 15: 71-89Montgomery CA, Porter ME (1991) Strategy: seeking and securing competitive advantage.

Harvard Business School Publishing, BostonMontgomery CA, Wernerfelt B (1988) Diversification, Ricardian rents , and Tobin's q.

Rand Journal 29 : 623-632Mueller DC (1972) A life cycle theory of the firm . Journal of Industrial Economy, July :

199-219Mukherjee AS, Lapre MA, Van Wassenhove LN (1998) Knowledge driven quality im

provement. Management Science 44 : 35-49Nakane J (1986) Manufacturing futures survey in japan: a comparative survey 1983-1986

Tokyo. Waseda University, System Science InstituteNelson RR (1991) Why do firms differ and how does it matter? Strategic Management

Journal, Winter: 61-74Nelson RR, Winter SG (1982) An evolutionary theory of economic change. Harvard Busi

ness Press, CambridgeNelson RR, Winter SG (1974) Neoclassical vs. evolutionary theories of economic growth:

critique and prospectus. The Economic Journal 84: 886-905New CC (1992) World class manufacturing versus strategic trade-offs: international Journal

of Operations and Production Management 12: 19-31Noble MA (1995) Manufacturing strategy: testing the cumulative model in a multiple coun

try context. Decision Sciences 26 : 693-720Noda T, Collis OJ (2001) The evolution of intraindustry firm heterogeneity: insights from a

process study . Academy of Management Journal 44 : 897-925

188 References

Norusis MJ (1993) SPSS for Windows : professional statistics, Release 6.0. Prentice Hall,Chicago

Norusis MJ (1994) SPSS for Windows: Anwenderhandbuch fur das Base System Version6.0. SPSS, Munchen

Nunally J (1978) Psychometric theory. 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill , New York et al.Osterloh M, Frost J (1998) Prozel3management a1s Kernkompetenz. Gabler, WiesbadenPannirselvam G, Siferd S, Ruch W (1998) Validation of the Arizona governor's quality

award criteria: a test of the Baldrige criteria. Journal of Operations Management 16:529-550

Parasuraman A, Zeithaml VA, Berry LL (1988) Servqual: a multiple item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing 64: 12-40

Penrose E (1959) The theory ofthe growth of the firm. Oxford University Press, OxfordPeter J (1979) Reliability : a review of psychometric basics and recent practices. Journal of

Marketing Research 16: 6-17Peter J (1981) Construct validity: a review of basic issues and marketing practices. Journal

of Marketing Research 18: 133-145Peter J, Churchill G (1986) Relationships among research design choices and psychometric

properties of rating scales: a meta-analysis . Journal of Marketing Research 23: 1-10Peteraf MA (1993) The cornerstones of competitive advantage: a resource-based view.

Strategic Management Journal14: 179-191Peters TJ, Waterman RH (1982) In search of excellence. Harper and Row, New YorkPeterson R (1994) A meta-analysis of Cronbach's coefficient alpha. Journal of Consumer

Research 21: 381-391Petts N (1997) Building growth on core competencies - a practical approach. Long Range

Planning 30: 551-561Phillips LW (1981) Assessing measurement error in key informant reports: a methodologi

cal note on organizational analysis in marketing. Journal of Marketing Research 18:395-415

Porter ME (1980) Competitive strategy. The Free Press, New YorkPorter ME (1981) The contributions of industrial organizations to strategic management.

Academy of Management Review 6: 609-620Porter ME (1985) Competitive advantage : creating and sustaining superior performance.

The Free Press, New YorkPorter ME (1991) Towards a dynamic theory of strategy. Strategic Management Journal 12:

95-117Porter ME (1996) What is strategy? Harvard Business Review, November-December: 61

78Powell TC (1992) Strategic planning as competitive advantage. Strategic Management

Journal13 : 551-558Powell TC (1995) Total quality management as competitive advantage : a review and em

pirical study. Strategic Management Journal 16: 15-37Prahalad CK, Hamel G (1990) The core competence of the corporation . Harvard Business

Review, May-June : 79-91Rasche C (1994) Wettbewerbsvorteile durch Kernkompetenzen . Gabler, WiesbadenRasche C, Wolfrum B (1994) Ressourcenorientierte Unternehmensfuhrung. DBW 54: 501

517Reed R, DeFillippi R (1990) Causal ambiguity, barriers to imitation, and sustainable com

petitive advantage. Academy of Management Review 15: 88-102Robins J, Wiersema MF (1995) A resource-based approach to the multibusiness firm: em

pirical analysis of portfolio interrelationships and corporate performance . StrategicManagement Journal 16: 277-299

References 189

Roquebert JA, Phillips RL, Westfall PA (1996) Markets vs. management: what 'drives'profitability? Strategic Management Journal 17: 653-664

Roth AV, Jackson III WE (1995) Strategic determinants of service quality and performance: evidence from the banking industry. Management Science 41: 1720-1733

Rubin PH (1973) The expansion of firms. Journal of Political Economy 81: 936-949RUdiger M, Vanini S (1998) Das Tacit-Knowledge-Phanornen und seine Implikationen fllr

das Innovationsmanagement. DBW 4: 467-480Ruhli E (1994) Die Resource-Based View of Strategy. In: Gomez P, Hahn D, MUller

Stewens G, Wunderer R (eds) Unternehmerischer Wandel- Konzepte zur organisatorischen Erneuerung. Gabler, Wiesbaden, pp 32-57

RUhli E (1995) Ressourcenmanagement. Die Unternehmung 2,91-105RumeIt RP (1984) Competitive strategic management: towards a strategic view of the firm.

In: Lamb RB (eds) Competitive Strategic Management. Prentice Hall, EnglewoodCliffs, NJ, pp 557-570

Rumelt RP (1991) How much does industry matter? Strategic Management Journal 12:167-185

Rumelt RP, Wensley R (1981) Towards a strategic theory of the firm. in: Lamb (ed) Competitive strategic management. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, pp 556-570

Saraph JV, Benson PG, Schroeder R (1989) An instrument for measuring the critical factorsfor quality management. Decision Sciences 20: 810-829

Schmalensee R (1985) Do markets differ much? The American Economic Review, June:341-351

Schmitt N, Stults, DN (1986) Methodology review: analysis of multitrait-multimethod matrices. Applied psychological measurement 10: 1-22

Schonberger RJ (1986) World class manufacturing: the lessons and simplicity Applied. TheFree Press, New York

Schoonhoven CB (1981) Problems with contingency theory: testing assumptions hiddenwithin the language of "contingency" theory. Administrative Science Quarterly 26:349-377

Schroeder RG, Anderson JC, Cleveland G (1986) The content of manufacturing strategy:an empirical study. Journal of Operations Management 6: 405-416

Selznik P (1957) Leadership in administration . Harper & Row, New YorkShapiro C (1989) The theory of business strategy. RAND Journal of Economics 20: 125

137Sharma S, Durand RM, Gur-Arie 0 (1981) Identification and analysis of moderator vari

ables. Journal of Marketing Research 18: 291-300Sharma SC (1996) Applied multivariate Techniques. Wiley, New York et aI.Shepherd WG (1972) The elements of market structure: review of economics and Statistics

54: 25-37Shi Y, Gregory M (1998) International manufacturing networks - to develop global com

petitive capabilities . Journal of Operations Management 16: 195-2I4Silverman BS (1999) Technological resources and the direction of corporate diversifica

tion: toward an integration of the resource-based view and transaction economics. Management Science 45: 1109-1124

Simon H (1988) Management Strategischer Wettbewerbsvorteile. Zeitschrift fur Betriebswirtschaftslehre 58: 461-480

Singh H, Zollo M (1999) Post-acquisition strategies, integration capability, and the economic performance of corporate acquisitions . INSEAD Working Paper 99/42/SM

Skinner W (1969) Manufacturing - missing link in corporate strategy. Harvard BusinessReview, May-June: 136-145

Skinner W (1974) The focused factory. Harvard Business Review, May-June : 113-121

190 References

Skinner W (1978) Manufacturing in the corporate strategy. Wiley, New YorkSkinner W (1986) The productivity paradox. Harvard Business Review, July-August: 55-59Slater SF, Narver JC (1994) Does competitive environment moderate the market orienta-

tion-performance relationship? Journal of Marketing 58: 46-55Smith TM, Reece JS (1999) The relationship of strategy, fit, productivity, and business per

formance in a services setting. Journal of Operations Management 17: 145-161Spanos YE, Lioukas S (2001) An examination into the causal logic of rent generation : con

trasting porter's competitive strategy framework and the resource-based perspective .Strategic Management Journal 22: 907-934

Spender JC (1989) Industry recipes: an enquiry into the nature and sources of managerialjudgement. Basil Blackwell, Oxford

Spender JC (1996) Making knowledge the basis of dynamic theory of the firm. StrategicManagement Journal 17: 45-62

Stalk G Jr (1988) Time - the next source of competitive advantage . Harvard Business Review, July-August: 41-51

Stalk G Jr (1991) The strategic value of time. In: Blackburn 10 (eds) Time-based competition : the next battle ground in American manufacturing . Business One Irwin, Homewood, pp 67-101

Stalk G Jr, Evans P, Shulman LE (1992) Competing on capabilities : The new rules of corporate strategy. Harvard Business Review, March-April : 57-69

Starbuck WH (1965) Organizational growth and development. In: March, 10 (ed) Handbook of Organizations. Rand McNally, Chicago, pp 451-533

Steenkamp J, Trijp H (1991) The use of LlSREL in validating marketing constructs . International Journal of Research in Marketing 8: 283-299

Swamidass P, Newell W (1986) Manufacturing strategy: its assessment and practice. Journal of Operations Management 6: 471-484,

Swamidass P, Newell W (1987) Manufacturing strategy, environmental uncertainty andperformance : a path analytical model. Management Science 33: 509-524

Sweeney MT, Szweyczewski M (1996) Manufacturing strategy and performance: a studyofthe UK engineering industry. Journal of Production Management 16: 23-41

Szulanski G (1995) Unpacking stickiness: an empirical investigation of the barriers totransfer best practice inside the firm. Academy of Management Journal, Best Papers:437-441

Szulanski G (1996) Exploring internal stickiness : impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal 17: 27-43

Tallman SB (1991) Strategic management models and resource-based strategies amongMNEs in a host market. Strategic Management Journal 12: 69-82

Teece OJ (1982) Towards an economic theory of a multiproduct firm. Journal of EconomicBehavior and Organization 3: 39-63

Teece OJ (1998) Capturing value form knowledge assets: the new economy, markets forknow-how, and intangible assets. California Management Review 40: 55-79

Teece OJ, Pisano G (1994) The dynamic capabilities of firms: an introduction . Industrialand Corporate Change 3: 537-556

Teece OJ, Pisano G, Shuen A (1997) Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal 18: 509-533

Thomas H, Pollock T (1999) From 1-0 economics' S-C-P paradigm through strategicgroups to competence-based competition : reflections on the puzzle of competitivestrategy. British Journal of Management 10: 127-140

Thorstone LL (1947) Multivariate factor analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL

References 191

Tracey M, Vorderembse MA, Lim JS (1999) Manufacturing technology and strategy formulation : keys to enhancing competitiveness and improving performance. Journal ofOperations Management 17: 411-428

Tunalv C (1992) Manufacturing strategy - plans and business performance . InternationalJournal of Operations and Production Management 12: 4-24

Tyndall G, Gopal C, Partsch W, Kamauff J (1998) Supercharging supply chains: new waysto increase value through global operational excellence . Wiley, New York et al.

Ulrich D, Lake D (1991) Organizational capability : creating competitive advantage . Academy of Management Executive 5: 77-91

Venkatraman N, Ramanujam V (1986) Measurement of business performance in strategicresearch : a comparison of approaches. Academy of Management Review II : 801-814

Verona G (1999) A resource-based view of product development. Academy of Management Review 24: 132-142

Vickery SK, Droge C, Markland RE (1996) Dimensions of competitive strength in manufacturing : an analysis of competitive priorities in the furniture industry . Journal of Operations Management 15: 317-330

Vokurka RJ, O'Leary S, Flores B (1998) Approaches to manufacturing involvement: useand performance implications. Productions and Inventory Management Journal 29: 4248

Von Krogh G, Cusmano MA (200 I) Three strategies for managing fast growth . Sloan Management Review, Winter : 53-61

Ward P, Duray R, Leong GK, Sum, CC (1995) Business environment, operations strategy,and performance: an empirical study of Singapore manufacturers . Journal of Operations Management 13: 99-115

Ward PT, Bickford OJ, Leong GK (1996) Configuration of manufacturing strategy, business strategy, environment and structure . Journal of Management 22: 597-626

Ward PT, Duray R (2000) Manufacturing strategy in context: environment, competitivestrategy and manufacturing strategy . Journal of Operations Management 18: 123-138

Ward RJ, McCreery JK, Ritzman LP, Sharma D (1998) Competitive priorities in operationsmanagement. Decision Sciences 29: 1037-1048

Wernerfelt B (1984) A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal 5:171-180

Wernerfelt B (1989) From critical resources to corporate strategy . Journal of General Management 14: 4-12

Wheelwright SC (1978) Reflecting corporate strategy in manufacturing decisions . BusinessHorizons, February : 57-66

Wheelwright SC (1981) Japan - where operations really are strategic . Harvard BusinessReview, July-August: 67-74

Wheelwright SC (1984) Manufacturing strategy: defining the missing link. Strategic Management Journal 5: 77-91

Wheelwright SC, Bowen HK (1996) The challenge of manufacturing advantage . Production and Operations Management 5: 59-77

Wheelwright SC, Hayes RH (1985) Compet ing through manufacturing. Harvard BusinessReview, January-February: 99-109

Widaman K (1985) Hierarchically nested covariance structure models for multitraitmultimethod data. Applied Psychological Measurement 9: 1-26

Williams FP, D'Souza DE, Rosenfeldt ME, Kassaee M (1995) Manufacturing strategy,business strategy and firm performance in a mature industry. Journal of OperationsManagement 13: 19-33

Williams JR (1992) How sustainable is your competitive advantage? California Management Review, Spring : 29-51

192 References

Wilson DC, Collier DA (2000) An empirical investigation of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award causal model. Decision Sciences 31: 361-390

Winter sa (1987) Knowledge and competence as strategic assets. In: Teece, DJ (ed) Thecompetitive challenge. Harper and Row, New York" pp 159-184

Wonnacott TH, Wonnacott RJ (1981) Regression - a second course in statistics. Wiley,New York et al.

Zollo M, Winter S (1999) From organizational routines to organizational capabilities.INSEAD Working Paper 99/48/SM

Zott C (2000) Dynamic capabilities and the emergence of intra-industry differential firmperformance: insights from a simulation study. INSEAD Working Paper 2000/86/ENT

Appendix - Questionnaires

194 Appendix - Questionnaires

WHUExeollenCl! In M.n'l"m<nt EduCIUon

The Impact of Management Capability onOperational Performance

Confidential

Please return the completed quest ionnaire to:

Andreas EndersWHU

Wissenschaflliche Hochschule fOr UnternehmensfOhrungBurgplatz 2.56179 Vallendar, Deulschland

Fan: oWl9-(0)261 - 6509-386Fax: +4&-(0)261 - 6509-389.mail: 'tDdp§Wby ,sly

All responses will be completelv confidential. No Individual respondent or institution willbe Identified In relation to the data reported in this questionnaire.

Appendix - Questionnaires 195

INSTRUCTIONS

OBJECTIVE OF THE SURVEYThe objective of this survey is to collect information on the impact management capability on operationalperformance. The study is based on the "INSEAD Industrial Excellence Award™" which examines the roleof management quality as a stimulus to operational excellence at the business unit level for 8 years now.

USE OF SURVEYThe survey is addressed to the head of prod uct ion of your business unit. All questions are designed sothat they can be answered by one person. Please answer all questions if possible, even if you cannotprovide the exact answer . An adequate, but approximated answer is more valuable than an incompletequestionnaire. For the few questions that require quantitative information it is not necessary to reportprecise data. A rough estimate based on your personal judgment is largely sufficient. In some cases wehave asked very similar questions, this is however necessary for methodological reasons.Note that for most questions there is not a good or a bad answer. Management quality is rather dependenton a set of external factors that are company or industry specific. Management quality might thereforerequire a high score for one company on a certain question while for a different company a lower score onthe same question would resemble management quality .

GUARANTEE OF CONFIOENTIALITYWe guarantee that all answers will remain absol utely confidential and that they will not be used toevaluate individually the performance of your organization. All results will be presented on an aggregatelevel, so that it will be absolutely impossible to identify participants .

GETTING STARTEDCompleting the questionnaire takes about 30 minutes. In most of the questions you will simply be askedto express your opinion on a statement or 10 compare alternative choices by checking a number. If yourcompany is part of a large corporation, answer the questionnaire by referring 10 your business unit or toyour function.

A BIG THANK YOUWe sincerely appreciate your time and effort in completing the questionnaire. In return we will send you acomplete study with all results on the questionnaire and the management concepts that builds the basis forthis survey.

Thank you very much for your precious collaboration!

Respondent Profiler - J; COMPANYNAM._E_'-----------------------------------11Youn.NAME:

i JOBTIIlE: i

I; AoDRESS '~ i,1PHONEANDEMAJl '· i


INDUSTRIAL SECTOR AND COMPANY PROFILE

INDUSTRIAl..SECTOR PROFi lE

INOUS'lRIAl. SECTOR: _

INOUS'lRIAl. SEerOOLFE CYa.E~ O S INn . lJp 0 FASTGROWIH a S IABlEGn<lWTH 0 MAlUlITY o !JEcLJIE

aTRCNGLY OISAGR!I ITRONGLY MAO

INOLJIKNl~ IlUSI£SS, cusror.ERS' PROOUCT PREfEAENCCS OWlGE QUITEA err OVERn.E _ 1Ilal ell<llellGl<l>

OURCUSTOOERSTENOTOLooocrORr£WPROOUCfSALL 1>ETt.E..._ ellal ellCD ellGl<l>

::O~===:~;;:-'a:'=!HAT _ Cll e al CD ellII <l>

COt.FElrTlOH INOUR IlUSI£SS IS CtITIK<OAT•• _ _ _ _ ellal ell<D <D Il <l>WECATERTOWHf~ n £ SM£ CIJSTOUERS !HATv.,; USED TO nEPAST _ ••<D al Q) CD ellGl <l>ANYIHING '!HATON'. COtotPEmOR CAN« FFR, 0Tl F RS CAN"ATQI REAOLy _ ..PRta: COl.I'ETITlONISAHALUoWlK~ OLJIINllI.mRV._ _ _ _ al al Q) G> CD fI) <l>~I£AAS~ At£WOOlJPEnT1\lEUOVEIIUo1OSTE'lmYDAy_ _ _ _ _ ••lIl al ellG> ellII <l>

OUR COM'ETmON IS 'HA1M<.Y_ _ _ _ .. CD CD Q) G> ell fI) <l>

TIE TECtflOlOGYINOLJlNJUSmY IS CHANGING lW'lOl.y 

~~~~~r==~~TtaNlLOGY IN __ _ _ _ _ ..

TECtflOl OGlCALCHANGES PROVIlE B03Ol'PORll.NT1ES t< OUR I'OJS1RY _ _ CD <l> ell(!) IS)Gl<l>

==ot:~=..= :ssO'E _ <P<%lell<llellGl<l>

TEONOLOGICAL IJEWLGPIoIENTSt< OUR IMlUlIlRY _ RAlH'R t.e«lll _ _._ _ __ _ <D <%l Gl(!) GlGl<l>

COUPAlIY PROfilE

NAME(8)~nE ..At<PROOUCT<JROL.f>(8): ..• _

COt.FEm~POSIllON (..-eT~) 0 MN<l<ETLEAOER 0~ PLAvm 0 SlONFICANT PLAvm 0 O llER

N\.IJlltR~E_0YEE8 (t< PRODUCTION): _

UNrr~ OUTPUT: (E.C. PIECE', UIR£S, l<I.os. EIC.)

PIl<lOUCl IOHVOLlAE. 0 <100 0 100-1000 0 1000·10 0000 10.000-100.000 0 100.000·11,110 0 1~llO-l0M'" 0 >lOMlO

A\4:RAGCCUSTcu:R ORlXR SUC 0 1 0 1·10 0 11-60 0 51·100 0 100-1000 0 1000-10000 0 >10000

PERQ'NTAGE OELlANDBYINTERNAl. CUSTOMERS(CEHmAL I'IIW'EHDUSE ETC.) ("'VALLE): APPROX. ""

P£Ha:HTAAf:Of SlK'lJl::RSntAJOfllVER8O% Of AU SlFPlES(NVAUE): N'fJROX. ""

NI.UlER~ ElCTERHAL. SIJPl'I.£RS (..PROOUCTION) 0 <10 0 1~0 0 50-100 0 tllO-3OO 0 300-500 0 500-1.000 0 >1.000

HUMAN RESOURC E MANAGEMENT

GENERAL INFORMATION

STROMGL.Y DI'SAQ Ra 'TRONGL.Y AGA~!

AVERAGE ......OYEE ABaEHTt ... RATE (.. 11£ LASTYEAR) .8 t.lllln NlLISTR\' AVERAOE.......... ..._ ........._ ..<D <%l Gl(!) ell fI) (l)

A'JI.RAOLUJPlOYLt T\.IlHOvaI"-" E (INU ",LA." rr....) 1S~1"'..... IRYAVUlAOC,. ......... ... ............... ..(l) <%l Gl (!) ell fI) <l>EIA'lOYEESATISFACTION ISVffiY HKlH...... . .. ...... . .. .. ................... _ ......... _ ......... _ ............... ... ... ..OUGHPARTICPAnON.. .. .. ... ...... .. . ........... ........... .. ..._ .. (J) CD a> CD ell (I) <l>EM''lOYfE8 VERY ~TEN BYPASS f<RAAL QWl<ELSANCPROCEDURESTOGET nElR JOB 00Nf, .. .... ......... ..e CD GlCD CD Gl(l)

COMPETENCE DIMENSION

T,",~ _ ALWAYS RESOU\CESAVAIlAlll£ roo EI.lPLOYEE mAIIII'G ............ ........................ ........ . .. . _ ..(J) CD ellCD CD fI) <l>TI£/le 18AfORl.W, PROCESSTOTRAIN EY'lQYEES ONDATA£S!!J.!;Qm!!'IECIfl03UE8... .. . _ ......_ .. . .. .. .. _ ..IIolI'RO'IEMENT~ANC TOTALPREUI'TIVEIolA.NTENNlCEACTlvrncs_REGUARLY CNlREDOUT._.. CD <D a> (!) (l) fI) <l>EMf'lOYfES AIlE mAINED TO USE PflOllLEI,4 SOLVt<G

...................................................................GlCD GlCD IS)~ (l)l Ea.4IQUES SUCHAS CAlJSE/tH) EFfECT DlAGR.AJ.ts.


RESPoNSIBIUlY DIMENSION

~ l.tE WORKfSlSINSPECT DE QUAlITY QF DEIRW""" THE..5 ""5 _ 0 0 <D (!) G> G) 0

' """,,Cl lONISNOTIt" ""Sf'ONSIJUlVQF foN NSPECTOR••_ _ _ _ <D 0 <D (!) <D G) 0

LIolEWORI<ERS NlE ENCClI.IV.GED TOFIXPROlllDo1STHEVFW lHEl.lSElVE5._•••_ 0 0 <D Ell G> G) 0

LIolEW<lRKERS AREGMN 1l£R£SOUICUPECESSARVTOCORRECTOlIAU1YPROlllfM51l£VF1H> _ .. <D <:l <D (!) C9 G) 0

A PROOlEMSOlYM NETWORK " AVAI.AIllETOllolE WOflKERS NSOlVNlOUAlTYREl.ATrDI'ROIlll:Ml\ _ ..0 <2) G> @C9Ii>0

"-.OVEESARE '_GRATEON THESTRATEGY M'U.IoE,"ATIOH PROCEss _ _._.. <D 0 <D @C9 G) 0

Et.ftOYEECOI-ftNSAlloN .5H1GH.VPERFOIlMANCEORENTED _ _ _ 0 <2) C9 (!) C9 G) 0

TAS!< 0ISTRIlUT1ON IS NOTON.YDOtE BYWlNACEMENT BUTA.IOM EFfORTTOCEDER WlTHWOOKE"" ID <2) CD I!lCD G) 0

KN OWL E DG E R E S O UR C E MANAG EM ENT

GENERAL INFORMATION

lOW H""llEGR£E OFAUT",,"11ON QF OPERATIVE POOCESSEs•••••_ ._••••••••_ •••••••_ ......... ........ ...._ ......... ... _ ••0 (l) C9 @ C9 G) 0

IF AlJTOMA11<lN ISAN ONOOINGPROCESS, AUT""..TIONPOTEHTlAl.SC<lNSIOERED... . . . . .. .. . . . . .. . .. . . .. . . . . . . .. . _ ••(l) <2) (l) (!) C9 G) 0

&TRONOlY DISAGR! e' STROMGLYAoA.!1!'

PRocEss OEVEl.OPMENT ISAST~lSED""" llOCWENITD PROCE55._........._ ............_ . ... .. . .. .. . . .. ..(l)0 <D (!) <ll CIl 0

Il'EORMATlON8YS1EM9 ARESTNOARDtSED~ROSSDEP~•• .... ...................... ......................_(l)e <D @ C9 0

BENCHMARKING

WEEXlENSMLY~AGI.NSTfIl!lIll&IliQF OOI.O'ETITORS OF0Ul Nl\ISlBY .. . . . . .. .. . . .. .... ..... .. . . .. ..(l) <2) CD a> CD CIl (l)

OUlIlf~ACTMT1ES ..."" J>El>XEDCOl>"'T... . ... . ....... _ . ..... .. .. .. . .. .. .. ... _ .. .. .. ...... ... .. .. ........ ..0 <2) CDI!l CD CIl0

WEEXTENSl\IElV1lENCH>WlI(_TBlIStESS~Of COMPJINoESFROMOMRIIO.§JJll' ...... ........(l) <:l CD (!lCD CIl0

IlENcHI.tARKNGHASHELPEDII.I'AOVEOlJIPROOUCT.•_ ... ... ... ... ..._ ... .......................__ ......... ......__(l)Q) <D (!lCD <1>0

WEWU DUINITEI.YCONI1M.E BeNCtNARJ<ING... ...... .. . _ •••_...._... .- .....__._ ....- . ..... ._..- ........ ..... ••0 <:l<D (!lCD <1>0

ACCUMULATION

THE SUCCEssI FAJUJ<E Of t.f'ROVEMEI'lT PROJECTS IS..... . ........... ......._ ...... _.. ...................0 <:l al (!l <ll CIl 0oocu.oEl'lTEO N AFORMAlPROCEss(FOR 1NTERNAI. 1RIINSfER~

WE AREUSINGREAl-TV.EPROCEss CONTROl SVSTUlS N MOSTPROCESSE5........................... ...... ...........0 <2) al (!l<ll CIl 0A lARGE PERCENTAGE; OF 11-EE~NT OR PRoasses ON me StIOPf LOOR

.. _ ............. .. ..... ............0 <:l al E!l <ll CIl 0ARECURRENTtY I.NOERSTATISTICAl QUALITY CONTROl.ACCEss

lOW H" "

AVAIlA!lI.ITYOF QUAlITY DATA (ERIlORRATES,DEFECT RATES, ETC_ .. . . .. .. .... .. . ........... .. . . .. ........_ .. ....._ .. (l)Q)<ll(!l<llCll0

TIMEltESSQF OUAlITYDATA_. ... . . . . _ •••_ .......... . ......................... ... . . ....... ......... ......... ........... . .....CD Q)<D@C9 CIl0

ExTe<T TO WHlC>1 l&!1L1D:DATAAREAV....-ETO MANAGERS""" SU'ERVlSORS_ ••••_ ... . .. ...... ........... ......CD (l) al Ell C9 G) 0

EXTENT TOWHDIC!lOOIICTMTYDATAAREAVAllAllLETO E.....l OYEES................. .. .... ...... .. .......... ... ... .. ...Cll<2) al (j) <ll CIl0

EXTENT TOWHDIQllAI.ITYDATAAREAVAUI'Jl.£.TO~ ........ . . .. ........ . ............ .. _... . .. _.. ... .. _... .. . .. (l)<2)al@C9I1><D

EXTENT TOWHk:H OUALITY MTA, CONTROl QiAATS, ETC..... .... ._........................................ .... .._ ••Cll <D (l) E!l al 11>0AREDISPlAYED ATEl.I'I.OYEEWORKSTATIONS.

US E OF KNOWLEDGE

EXTENTTOW>«:HQUAUTY DATA AREUSEDASTOOlS TOIolANAGE CIUAUTY..... ...... . ...... ..... .... ..... .. .............CD Q)(l)E!l (l) II> 0

EXTENTTOWHlC>1 QllAI./TY DATAAREUSED TOEVAJ.IJATE Sl.f'ER\IlSOR""" L<ANAGERlAlPERfORMANCE.... . .. .. ...(l) <l) (l) <D C9 ill (l)

EXTENT TOW>«:HBENCHl-WlKHGNFORl"llOt<ISUSED TO SETsmETai PERfORl.''''''''' TARGETS_. .. .. .... _ _ Cll <l) (l)@ (l) ~ 0

EXTENT TOW>«:H~ NFORMAllOt<1SUSEDTO IJENTIfYI\FRQ VEMENHEEOS......_ ..... ............(l) <l) <D (!) C9 ill 0ExTalTTQWlilDH£NCHM__ NF"""..TlOtlI5USEDTO IJEHTIfYCOt.I'£TITIVE STREN<lTHS. ..... . ............ ..(l) <2) al <D C9 ill <D


PHYSICAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

GENERAlINFORMA1ION

lOW H<l N

OEGREfm· vt-HJICAt. ~'HiRAnON(vAllEAI.lt::O HV I f*: JJlANI ('X)IA' AHfD l 0 TotAl V", t.E.: AOOEO~........ _ ••_ ••ID (Z) CD 00 CD (i) CD

G.APfTAL INTENSITY Of 1l£. PAOllUCTlOtll'llOCl'SS (IN1ffiM9 Of PEOPlE , EOUAoENT, TECHlOtOOY, ETC••_ ._ ••C1l0 C1l 61C1l II)<1>

PR OCESS ORIENTAl lON

StRONGLY OIlAQREE ITRO'fQ"'T AGREE

SNGLE PROIlUCTLI'lESAR£flE_IllE FORAVAAlETV Of D<fFEREHTPIlOOUCT F...U,S•••_._•••••••••_ . _ ••<D <D C1l GlC1l II)<1>

PRooucI Dff ERENl1AnONlSl'OSlJ'ONE D TOll£ E'1DOf 1l£. PAOllUCnONPROCEss••••••••••_ •••••••••••••_ . _ ••tll 0 (l)GlC1l II)<1>

Tt£ TOTAL~OfPROllUCIFAMLES IS~._ ••••••••••••••••_._ •••_._••_ •••••••••_ ._••••••••••_ ._••<D 0 (l)61C1l iI)<D

WE REGt.UR.v JlWlD:CXJSTINO Pfl<Xll.Crswm'lOWCONTRI!UTION UARCIN__._._••••__ . _ •••_ ••••_ .__<D 0 <D 61C1l II)<1>

W E REGl.I..N4. Y I!!Qf. EXl'S'T1"IG PROlXJClSw,rn Lo.v COtlTRl6UTIONt..t.ItJmlN•••••• •••_ ••• •••. _ _ •••••• •. •• •__. _ •.<D!2l<D61C1lIl)(l)

WE TRYTO HOlD lHE tU.I8ER OF PAOllUCT VARW<,,; FOR Of£ PROOUCTION __ •__••_ ••_•••••••••_._••<ll12l (l) 5> C1l II)(l)IJE FIXEO Nt£) R,An£R ·OPtN A flEW UP< f OR1\ toC.W PROOUCTFMIllY.

PRooucTDlITEllENTIATIONISCONEAIll£ IEGINNm OFll£ I'ROlll)C1lON PflOCESS••••_ ••••_ ••_ ••••••_._._••12l12l (l) GlC1l II)<1>

STRU CTURE

TIE PROIlUCTIONFLOWIS DESKlNEDTOBEV1StllLE NDEASV lHlERSTANDAIll.E_ •••_. _ ••••••_ . _ ._ •••_ ••__•••<ll I2l (l) 5> C1l II)(l)

PRoceSSNDFROOUCTlAOOtFlCATIONSAREonENDONE S•••.uANEOUSlV••••••••••_ ••_ ••••••_. _ ••••••_._._•••<ll 0 <ll 61(l) iI) (l)

W E ST.MOARDtSI:. PROCESSES ATOIEFFEP£N'TPROOJCTK>NlI'ES t.I 'THE: $ME. WAY••_ .............__._••• •_ ._•.<ll0<ll(l)(l)iI)(l)

WOAKOR PflOCESSIIISTRUCnONcr.u< 10 WORKERS NlEALWAVS \U<V Cl£AR ••_ ••_ ••• ••••••• •••_ ••••• ••••_._•••<ll 0 (l) <!l (l) II) (l)

NON ·PHYSICAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

MARK£T ANALYSIS

LOW H!QH

ElmNT Of CUSTOMERDATAlJSA(l[ 10 IllENTIFY TRfNOSTOSETPflIOllITES FORflESOl.-RCE USACE._••••••••••_ ••tll 0 (l) 61C1l iI)(l)ExTENT TO WHat 1l£~ DEPNm.£NT IS AwAA£ Of Tl£ fl'Rt,.Iot,RYCUSTO'oER ••••••_._••••••••••••_ •.<ll 0 (l) <!l a>II) (l)flEOl_ MENTS (J'RODuCT CHAAl\CIHl1S11CS ETC.).

ExTmT fOY,HICH Tl-E PROOlICHQNDEPARTt.I: NTIS"'V.'/lSE.Of lJ<EPRaAARY CUSTOMER RE<XJtAE~EN15••••••••••<D0(l)Wa>II)(l)

ElmNT TO WHICII STRATEGIC Of'f'<lR1\.NIT1S CIoN BE •••••••••_._.__._._._._••••__._._......_._ ••<D 0 (l)61GlII)0IlENTIFED NlEI'ENDEN1l.VOf COUPETITI\IE COMPAAlSONS

EXTTNT TOWHDI 1I £ MARJ<El1NO NDlI .., ..........ACtI "'NG (Jfp..m EN. WORt< roos;n.... __._•••_ •••••••_ •••tll 0 <D ClJ C1l Gl(l)

STRONOLYOtsAa R!( ITRONOLY AGRI!

THE COMPANY IS FOlJ.OWfIGACOSTl£ADERSH1P AATHEIl1lW<ATECHlOtOOV ••••••_••••••_._••••••••••••_ ••C1l0 (l) C!l C1l ~ (l)OHt...HENlIATION (DE.'VU.OPt..4l:NI CIt LN Ol.EPftOUUCIS) SmAH .OV.

SrnATEGlC OPPORn.NrTESAREPR.. IARLVllJf.NTI'EDTKlOUGIl COt.FETTI1VECOt.F...1SONS. . .. ... . . . . .. .. . ...... . .Ql <%l (l) <!l Gl~ (l)

0L0l BUSINESS PlANS AREIJRlVEN MOREBYTECHlOtOGlCALIIDVN¥:.ES TlW< BY_TRfSEAACH••••_ ••••_ ••<D <%l (l)<!l a><!l(l)

nt: ACTNJlES Of lW H H[N I Ot"NUl~ NIS IN O lCSlILtiHSS lNT loPE. ....t::U COORDNttTED...... . .. . . ..... ............ _ ...CD (t) a> (i) (3) ill) <Z>

ST RATEGY

S rnATLGlC PlANS ARC TRANSlATID INTO SI'l:C"': .................._..............................._ ••<D I2l <ll 61C1l II)<1>ReQUREMENTSf~EACHOPERATOR!..NITOR OEPART1o£NT.

0L0lSTru\lEGIC f'lNOmC I'ROCESS LN<S _ T OI'l'ORT\JNITlES .•••_•••_••••_ ._••••••••••••_._••••••_._•••<ll<%l (l)ClJ C1l II)<!lTOnECOLPAN'f·SRESOLACES"""~8 .

Tt£ rot.FANY FflEOUE.NnVCAPT\IlES Lt<SERVED MARI<ET SEGI.EHTS........ _ ••••_._•••••••••••••_ ._•••••••••_ •••<D 0 (l) <!l C1l II)<1>

Re8Ol..llCE.S R£ALlOCATION t) If. CXJNTNJOUS PROCESS ........ ..._••_•••_••••_._••••••••••••_ ••••••••••••_ ••<ll <%l (J) ij) a>Gl(l)TOENSU1E.lHEACCOt-n...-..r Of STRAlEGICCC>AlS.

THE......,.Rf~ceSlRUCTUlEISEASLVQiANCEPACCORllINO TODfFERINOLIARl<ETt£EIlS. _ ••••••• _ ......<D 0 a>61C1l ~ <1>

THEf AST CHANCllNGUARKET ENVIlONl.lENT INCUl NlUSTRV FORCES us TO _._._._•••••••••_ ._•••_••••_...<D 0 (l)<!l C1l ~ <1>Ql..CKLyAO.AJST CUlRESOURCE STRUCnJRE ro ne hEW~T\JNIT1ES, .


EXTERNAL RESOURCE MANA GEMENT (S UP P LIER INTEGRAn O N)

S UPPI.IEROPERATIONAL PER FORMANCE

PERCDfrAGE Of LATESlFf'lE8 BYYOlR Sl.F'PLERS••_.__..C <1% 01·5% 0 6-10% 0 11·15'" 0 16-20% 0 21-25% 0 >25%

PERCrnTAGE Of OEfECTlVE SU'lU'S (DEfECTIVE ••___ 0 <0.5% 0 0.5-1% 0 1·2% 0 2·3% 0 3-4% 0 4-5% 0 >5%DHCTlY ATARRlV"l) BYYOU\~S

SUPPLIERDelEGATION

STRONGLY D tSAQA! 1 STROMaLY AGRE!

Sl.f>PlIt RS_ fREOUEfo'Tl.V ASSlSlEDTOt.FR<lIIE llER OUAUly.. .... ............ ... ......._ •••_. _ _ .. ......._ ••a> (p (l) (l) IS)lI>CD

Sl.f'PlJER8AREACTIIIE1.V I<VOLVEO I<Tl£~llEVELOPUEHTPROCESS__ ._•••••••••••••••_. ...... .. . .. . _ ••<!l(p a> (l) IS)lI>CD

Sl.f'PlJER8AREACTIVELV INVOl....O I<n£~ IJEVElQK<ENT PROCEss.. ......... . .. ... .. ... . _ ... .. . . ..... _ ••(l) (p (l) (!) IS> CD CD

SlflA.l{RSARE MEGIlATED IN TlE FCllI'.lUlAllON NJO INPlFM£NTA11ONOF Of£RATlVE S11lA1EC'f.......... ... _ ••a> (p (l) (l) IS)lI>CD

WERElYQNASloIAUtUA8EROf OEPEIOABl.E StP PUERS.. .. . . . ..... . .. . ... . .. ...... _ _._ •••••••••_ .. . ......__••<!lella> (!) IS)lI>CD

Sl.f>PlIEll8ARE PRIUARILVWOR<lolG NlEPENTlYOf ow COWNtY.. .. . .. . .. . _ •••_ ... .... .. . .. .. . _ .. .... ......__<P(p (I) (J) IS)Ii) CD

SUPPLIER MEASUREMENT

&FPuERKNOW-+iOWfOR~ ..PROVElo£NTSISfREOl.EHTLVUSEO... _ ... _ .. .... ......... _ ........ ...._ ••<!l (p (l) <!l IS)lI>ell

SVSI LM I<IECJl<AIIQNWlII.SU'I'lLRll (EOI. ErC.) ISH/OII. .. .. .. .. .. . _ . ....................... ....... _ ...... _ .. . _ _a> (p (l) (l) IS> (J) CD

~IERPllOOUCT1<JNmocESSDATAISAVAl.A8LE ..... _ ._... ......_._ ... ........ .. . . . ..... ... .. . ...... ... .. ..... .. ..<!l (p a> (J) IS)(J) CD

SUPPLIER PROCESS ORIENTATION

PORIKlNOf..-.ESIJEUVEIllOQN AJITBASIS(BlFFERS'OCK Of LESS 1HAN2 DAVS): ___%

ITRONGI.T DtSAQRtI 'TRONal,."I'Ao AU

WE AAE INTERESTED INOEVElOPNG Al ONG-TERM nELAT1Of'.ISJ-F "MlHSlFPlIERS...· ......u.__.........· . ..._ . ......a><P(l)(J)lS)lI> CD

EXT ERNAL RE SOURC E MANAGEMENT (CUSTOMER INTEG RATIO N.

CUSTOMERDELEGATION

WEARE OElMRlNGTONJU8TRY CUSTOMERS (ASOF'I'OSWTOfl<ALUSERS.. .. . . ........... . .. .. . _ ............ _ ..a> (p a> (!) IS)(J) ell

0JsT0UEAS ARE INTEGRATED IN 1l£ F(.'lRLI.I..ATlONN«J INJt.£J.E NTATtoN Of OPERATIVE STRAll;GY ................(l)<P(l)(!)(l)lI> CD

CUSTOUERS NlC INVOL....O.. THI:PA<lIlUCTION..ROa'SS........... ... .. ..... .. .. .... ... ... .. .... . .. .. . _ . .. .. . ...... ... . .(l) (p (l) (l) (l) Ii) CD

CUSTOMERMEASUREMENT

CUSTOl.lER DATA IS HIGK-VACCESSIIIlE (E.G. OUAllTYPEJ1fORWNCEDATAASWEllASOEWohOPA=-). .....a> <l> a> (J) IS)lI>CD

CUSTOl.lERfEEDElACKlStoEASLR'OAroDOOClOoENIIDI<AfORMALPROCESS.... .... . .. .. ....... .. . _ ... . . .. .. . .. _ ..a> <l> a> (!) IS)Ii) CD

CusTOI.ER fEEDBACK ISDR::C1EOTOAST~HlERf~ INTHE eot..,Nlt ._ ............._......... _.. .... (l)(l)a> (!)lS)al CD

IN 1liIS PRQOUCTION OEPAATMEIIT 'AIO MEET WITH CUST()I,/[RS.. . ......... ..._ •••_ •••_ •••_ ._•••••••••_ ._••(1) <l> (l) (j) IS)(J) CD

ATlE.A$1 ONCE. AYEAR TOSEEWt~T PROOIJCT8lllEY J£CIJIRE

CUSTClI.ER0A1AfQR 1>£ t.O'ROVUtENTOfJ-'ROaoSSES ISNOTACCEsseU;TO II£PRQOOCTIONOEPT.... ... .. . ..a> <l> a> (!) IS)C!l CD

PERFORMANCE PROFILE

BUSIHEllll UNITFINANCIAL PERfORMANCE PRORLE

CEa..... STATIC FASt CRONTH

1\.JlNoVERllEVELOPUEHT(LASI Y£AAl 0 <-15% 0 ·15-5% 0 ·5->5% 0 5-15% 0 15-25% 0 25-35% 0 >35%

DoVfL"""" NT OflH' EIVT (I..'VEN.L. o <-3% a -3-1% a·l·+1% a l·3% a 3-5% a 5-7% a >7%

ITROWGLT DtsAGREE ITAONOLT M AlE

OU<_T S>W<E(INGERMNtY) CONTNJOUSlVINCJ>EASEOI<UEPAST3 yEJIRS (l) <l> (l) (j) IS)CD CD

INCQHIRAST TOOl.lR COIoIPEllTORSWl; HA"';HAO AIlETTER OEVELOPtoENT INUE lASr YEAR a> <l> a> (J)GIll> ell

TfE PUNT IlEENVERYPROfITA8LEOVERTl£ LAST 3 YEARS Q) (p a> (!) IS)(J) (!)


BUSINEss UNIT OPERATIONAL P ER FORMANC E PROFII.E

TIE 'WU'AClUllNG STRATEGYfOCUS Of ll£ ••••••__._..............0 Qua ly o DellverylRofiobilly o lowC<>s1 o Floxlblityr.OMP...., "ON ('"""*' 11_ "'* """"'IU)

QuAll1Y

MItUlrO* INCOIIINC INSl'l'CTION. REVIfW, CA ClECK...a.. .. . . . .. . . . . _ . .. . .. . . . .. . ... _ ... . ........ _ ......o NONE o $ALFt.NO 0 100%

~Of IH--PROCUS ~CftOf.l,UEVEW, OR OECK...a. . ....... ....._._ ... ......_ .........._ ._•••• ••D N<>t.E O SIoIM'I."'" 0 100%

FI NISt£O PROOUCT OEfICIENCYES HAVE BEEN........ ._ ...0 >10% 0 5-10% 0 3-5% 0 2-3% 0 1·2% 0 0·1% o NCREA6£

RElJUCU) BY (IN %) (N TIE lAST YEAR)

FINISHI'D PROOUCTItilCENCY IlAT~ (ppu) (or ...... ..._ ...0 <0.1%0 0,1-0,5%0 0,5-1% 0 1·2% 0 2-3% 0 3-5% 0 >5%ALL PRODUCTIOHl.fllnSAJ F..... TESTAREA)

CusTOt.ER C<lY'lAINT RATE (Pf'M) (IlEfECTIIIE ..... ... .... ...0 <0.1%0 0,1-0,5%00,5-1% 0 1-2% 0 2-3% 0 3-5% 0 >5%ATAP.RNN.PROOUC1SAS"'OF SHFPEOlNJS)

ITAO\riIOL.T OISAQREE ITRONOlYAa REE

PRooucT QUI\l/TY WAS DRASlICAU.Y II.I'ROIIED INlHE PAST 5 Yl'AAS....................................................<lla> <llGl a> Cl C1J

CusTOl.ERSVAll.£ n£ ClW.ITYor ~PRODUCT1lASHIGHER!HANlt£ONE Of COM'EIlTORS ......... .. . ... _ ..<lla> <ll$ a> <Il C1J

Au. .......OVUS IlUE"" .... , ClW. IIY IS ll£R.-w<Y RESP<lNSIlLITY. . .. ..... _ . ...... .. . ......... . ....... . ...... ..<lla>CD $ CD <Il C1J

ExJSTN> PRODUCTIONPROCESSESARE RE<UARlY REJolOVAlED... .. .... . .. . .. ...... __........................... _ ••<lla> CD ID<ll<Il C1J

CEPENIIABllINI R EUAllIlITY

OELIVERY TJ.E - f ROM INCOMI'IIG~ TONIRIIH. ATltE. OJST~ ........._ _ ............_ ............_ •.<lla>CD C!l CD <Il C1J-tIASUU :NOONllNJOUSlYHEnUCLOrllll£(5) lAST YEANS

DElNERY SOi8XJlES AREAlWAYS."1...................................................................._.................Cl> C1J CD Gl<ll<Il C1JPmCEHTAGE OF PROQ:SS ND PRODUCT

.. ...0 <5% 0 6-10% 01 1·15% 0 16-20% 0 21-25% 0 26-30% 0 >30%OE\ltLOPt.E.NT PROJECl S Wl IH SOEa.J.E 0VE:JlRLN8PmCEHTAOE Of lH'lA!'KJ) CN'AI;;fTYLOST

... ..............0 <2% 0 2-4% 0 4·6% 0 6·a% 0 8-10% 0 10-20% 0 >20%(DUE TO SET U' Tt.£S. I.IAJNTENANCE)

~OF PROllUCTION PlAN C>lANG£SPER .1ON1M........ ...0 <1 0 1·5 0 6-10 0 11·15 0 16-20 0 20-25 0 >25

CoaTI PROllUCTMTY

EI.FLoYEE PROOUCTMTY~lRO) (SAlES_ ._0 <200 a 200·250 0250-300 0 300-3500 35ll-400 0 400-450 0 >450REVEtUiTOTAl""-" 0* DIRECT UROYEES)

STRONG DEmE ASE STATIC w.xJA I'fCREA!IE

DE\e.0l'I.£NT OF lHE PRODUCTIONCOST PER lNT 0lIIPUT (VAllEO ATCOST) (Wll£ lAST YEAR)...... . ..... _ ••CD a>GIlD CD Cl C1J

DEIfiOt'lA.Hl 01 111. STOCK LEva. (STOCKVAlU'. 'N li E lAST \'L\II1......................_......................_ ..CP a> CD GlCD <Il <!I

llEvElOAoEHT OF CAPACITY USAGE (N Tl£ lAST YEARl.._._......................._ ..............._............_..CP a>CD <ll CD Cl C1J

STRONGLYOlSAQ.RU tTAO NQLYAQUI.

CAPACfTY USAGEtlA8 AI.RE/IDY Rf.Aa-lE.OA~"""'I OEGREE... . . . . .. . _ _ ........ . . . _ ...... . .. . .._ ••__.... ... .. .... .. CPa> a> C!la> II><!I

EOURVfT UlUlATIONHAS INCREASW (NlHE lAST YEAR)..... . . .... ... .. .... . .... •_ ... ... ......_ ... ........._ ••lIl III CD C!l a> <Il C1J

TIIIEI FLEXIIllllTY

THOAD. ,TYTO ' ..ACT ONDIo.......,t<a......SHASSlCN~ICANIlY• .nl<MD(N T>tE'ASrYfARL..... ...... ......CP a>CD Gl CD <Il C1J

ABl.rTY TO C>W<GEPRlORlT'ES (MACHfoERYASSIGte.'EHTS) Of JOBS ON TI£ SHOP FLOORLEVElISHIGH........ .. CP a> GI<ll CD <Il <ll

MANsACTURlNG LEAI>-T1MES (FRO" STARTOf PROOUCTIONTO END Of PROOlJCT1ON <lla>CD<ll<ll<ll C1JOf ASNGlE ORDER) HAVEIlEENCONSCERAIllYIl£IlUCEll ('NlHE lAST (3) YEARS~ ......................._.._..

SET.... lI t.E S HAVEBEENCON9IlERAlllY REIlUCEO (INlHE lAST YEARl.. ..... ... ... _ .............. . _ . . ..... . .... . ....CD a>CD ID CD <Il C1J

ElO'Rl:SS OllOCRS CAl< OCIIANOlLIl wmtOlJf DI'rICUlTIES....... ..... . ..............._ .. ............. _ .................Cl> a>CD (j) <llll> C1J

Thank you very much fOTyour cooperatio n.

WHUExcell.erlU 10 Mlragemenl ~uu.don


ZentralvortlandEleklrotechnlk· undEle!<tronIklnduslrle e.V.

~W~D

• Team Leader Questionnaire·

The Impact of Management Capabilityon Operational Performance

Confidential

Please return the completed questionnaire to:

Andreas EndersWHU

Wissenschafl liche Hochschule fUr UnlernehmensfiihrungBurgplalz 2. 56179 Vallendar. Deutschland

Fan: +49-(0)261 - 6509-386Fax: +49-(0)261 - 6509-389...mall: [email protected]<kJ

All responses will be completely confidential . No Indiv id ual respondent or Institution willbe identified in relation to the data reported in this questionnaire.


INSTRUCTIONS

OBJECTIVE OF THE SURVEY

The objective of this survey is to collect information on the impact management capability on operationalperformance. The study is based on the "INSEAD Industrial Excellence Award™ '' which examines the roleof management quality as a stimulus to operational excellence at the business unit level for 8 years now .

USE OF SURVEYThe survey is addressed to a production worke r (team leader) of your business unit , All questions aredesigned so that they can be answered by one person. This questionnaire resembles an excerpt of aquestionnaire that has been sent to the production manager. The reason for this "double"-questionnaire isto gain insight into the confo rmity of estimation of different funct ion in one company.Please answer all questions if possible, even if you cannot provide the exact answer. An adequate, butapproximated answer is more valuable than an incomplete questionnaire. In some cases we have askedvery similar questions, this is however necessary for methodological reasons.Note that for most questions there is not a good or a bad answer. Management quality is rather dependenton a set of external factors that are company or industry specific. Management quality might thereforerequire a high score for one company on a certain question while for a different company a lower score onthe same question would resemble management quality.

GUARANTEE OF CONFIDENTIALITYWe guarantee that all answers w ill remain ab solutely con fidential and that they will not be used toevalu ate individually the performance of your organization. All results will be presented on an aggregatelevel, so that it will be absolutely impossible to identify participants.

GETTING STARTEDCompleting the questionnaire takas abo ut 5· 10 minutes . In most of the questions you will simply be askedto express your opinion on a statement or to compare alternative cho ices by checking a number. If yourcompany is part of a large corporation, answer the questionnaire by referring to your business unit or toyour function .

A BIG THANK YOUWe sincerely appreciate your time and effort in completing the questionnaire. In return we will send you acomplete study with all results on the questionnaire and the management concepts that builds the basis forthis survey.

Thank you very much for your precious collaboration!

Respondent Profile

...............................;

···....·························· ·········1COMPANYNAM E:' _

Y OUHNAME: _

JOBTITLE :, _

AoORESS:, _

i! PHONEAND EMAIl;~========== ===========_==_=__=_==,_=,_=_=,_,=,_,========_=_=_=__=,,=_---'=j


HUMAN RESOURC E MANAG EMENT

GENERAL INFORMATION

8TROHOLY DlsAaR!'! ITRON<1LY MA£[

E ,.AOYfF SATlSF'ACTIOtiIS VEJlY~.•• •••••••• ••••••• ••••.• .•. •.•••• ••• •.••• •••. ••• .•.• ••••••••••..•• ••• ••••••• ••. •• .•• ••• (!)~<IlalGlill0

EfAllOYE£S Sl.I'POU.TS1l~~ OBJEC1lYES lKlOlJGH PNfTlC:ll'AllON . . .. .. . . . .. . ... . .. . . . .. .. . ... . .. . . .. . . . . . . .. . .. (!)<Il<llalGlill0

ElM'lOYEEll 'IERY onw BYPAllS FORMAl. CtWO'<EI.S JH:)PROC([lUlES roGET TtE"J08 ootE•••••••••••••••• o e e e e e eCOIlPETENCE DIMENSION

~~ AL¥/AYSRESCll.IlC£SAVAI../JIBlEFOREJ,IJlOYEETAAINING.. . ... ... .. .. .. ... . .. .. . .. ... .. .. .. .. .... . .... .... <Il<ll<ll(j)Glill0

1"J.£HI::. ISA FORt.w..flROQ:SS 10 lRAlNHfJlOYH :SONOATA~ TEoNQUES••. . .•• .• ••.• ••....• . ••. •.• .• <l><Il<llalGlill0

Tl£RE ISAFOIaW. PROCESSTOTIlAlN UoROYEfSONOATA~11'.~S .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .... .... ... (J)<IlGlt!lGlill0

ItMl'ROVUENT'WCn<SHOPSN..:J TOTALf'REEW'TM. LIrAHTEHAHCE AOTMTIESARE REGl.tAR. v~O OUT•• (!)~<Ilt!lGlill0

EY'LOYEES_ TRAN'D TO US1' """""EM sa.WID(J)~<IlalGlIllQ)

tEQHC::It.X.SSUCHAS CNJ5E A.~ effECT 0lAGfWJS..............................................,............... ...

R eSPONSlBIUTY DIMENSION

OUlLN:WOFlI<ERllONSPECT TIlEQlWJTV~ n lEoRwOI>J< TIlEMSClVE5. . .. .. . .... . .. . .. .... .. .. . . .. . .. .. .. .. ... .. . .. . <Il~<Ilt!lGlillQ)

INSPECTION ISWI TIE RfSPONSBUTV OFANNSPECTOR.. .. .. ...... .. .... .. .. . .... .. . .. .. .. .. ... . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... ... <Il~<IllDGlillQ)

lH: WonKERS N?F f.NCOl.RACEJ) 10 FCC pnoeu·,MS Tt-EY FIH) THEMSEIYEs .. . . .... . . . .. . . . ... .. . ... .. .. .. . .. ....... <Il<ll<ll lDGlillQ)

LIE 'WORKERS.ARE GIVEN UE RESOI..RCES l'ECESSAR'l" TO CORRECT OUALITY PROOI.EJ.tSl}£YFIN)•••••••.•• .• QlQ)<Il(j)GlIll Q)

A PI1OIll£M SOl.VN) too£IWORK 15AVAlAIllE TOLf£ l\'OllKfRS " SOlVING"",,,TVRflA11'.0PROlllnIS•••.. •. . <l>~Ql(!)GlIllQ)

EY'LOYEfSAREONrEGRAIW N IHESIRATEOY IAUMENJATlON PROCEllS.... .. ...... .. .... ... .. ...... .... ...... .. . . <Il<ll<lllDGlIllQ)

EY'olOYEEC()t,I3ENSA1'1ON ISHIICiH.YPERf~ ORE.NTED... .. ... .. . .... . . .. ... .. .. . .... .. . . .... . ... .. . . . . .. . .. . ... Ql<ll<llalGlIll0

TASK DlSTRIlUTION OS NOTON.Y llOt,£ BY MANAG£KNT1lUT AJOM' mORT TOGEn£Rwm' VtOR<fRS......... <Il<ll<ll(j)GlIllQ)

KN OWLEDG E RESOURC E MANAGEM ENT

ACCUIIUlATION

aTAQtjOI.T OISAOAR STAONGlT AoRU

THE SUCCEss! FAIUR: OF M'ROVl:~NT PROJECTS IS (J)<Il<lllDGl!llQ)lXICUIEHTfDNAFORMAI.PROCEss(FOR INIHlNAl_fR~

...... ......... ..... .... ........... ....... ........ ..We AREUSING-.·TM PROCESS COHJROl SYSTEUSNllOST PROCESSES.. .... ........ .. ....... . .... .... ......... (J)(l)<Il(!)GlIllQ)

A LAAGE PERCENTAGE Of n-E EQlIPMENTOR mOCESSE8~ ltlE b1iOPFLOOR(J)~(J)lDGlII>0

ME ClIlRENTlY lHlER STATI8TlCALQLWJTY CONTROL...................... .......... ...

AcCESS

LOW H""AVAILAIlUIY OFOUAlnv DATA(EmaR RATES. DEfECTRATES. ETC.).............. ... .. ... ...... .. .. ................... (J)~<Il(!)GlIll0

TIIoE1.ItIE.SS Of QtJAlJTY DATA... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . .. ..... .. ... .. ... .... . ........ .. . . .. . ........ . ......... .. . .. .... . .. ... ... ... . .. Ql(l)(J)(j)GllDQ)

ExTENT TOViHICHI'B9QUClMlYOATAARE AVNUoIU. TOEMPLOYEES.. .. .. .. .. ... ..... . .. .... .... . ........ ... .. ..... .. (J)(l)<IllDGlCDQ)

ExTENITOWHICH~DMA/11£AVAI.AIlLE TOtI>!12l:W......................................................... (J)~<IllDGl!ll0

ExTtNT 10 VII IQ t QUAUfY OAT.... (".QNTR()l awns. ETC. (!)<ll<lltllGlIll0_ DtsPlAva> ATfUPI.OYfEWORK STATlONS. ...........................................................

PHYSICAL RESOURC E MANAGEM ENT

ST RUCTURe

THE PROllUCTlONROW ISlJESlGNED TO BE VlSB..f JH:)fASY \.NlER$T-.E (J) <ll <Il (j)Gl II> Q)

PRocESSANl PRODUCT MOOFICATlONS_ OFTENootE S.....TANfOU!ll.Y. ... .. . ... .. . ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. <D (l)<IllD Gl illQ)

Wesr_PROCESSESATOIEFFERfNTPROllUCTlONLf£S"TIE_WAY Ql <Il <Il t!lGl ill Q)

WOfll(ORPA0CE8SNSTRUCTlONGl\IfNlO WOA<ERS ARfAlWAYS VERYa.EAR. (J) ~ <Il t!lGl 11I0


PROCESS ORIENTATION

STROJilOl Y OtSACREE 'TACKGLT AaRf:[

S NGlE PROOUCT LINES.ME RESPONS8lE f OR A VARIETY Of OtFFERf NT PROOUCTFN .IILE S.•. . ... . •. . .•. . .• ._. •. .

PRootJC1 OIFFFJENTIA1IONtSPOSIIlrQf\ED10 11£ EN) ()t" I .~ PROOl.cl D'tl flHOCf.l:r.J .••••• •.•••.••••• •. •••.•••••••

TI'ETOTAl~Of~T FAM.l.ES IS t«:REASfIKj " .

W[ REGU..ARl...Y IDENTifY EXISTING f"ROl:1.JCIS wnIiLOtt·" CONfRIJUTlON UAHGIN , " ..

WE REGU.ARlYOROPEXISTING I'ROOUCTSWrTH LOW OONTRI8UllON """"N ..

WE mv TO HOlD lI<E ....... am Of PROllllCT VARIANTS FOR ONE PROOUCTIONLrE F1XEDNCl RATHER OPENANEWUNEFORANEWF1>OOUCT F.... T.

PHooucr OtFff~NT1An ON 18OOI'oE "T HE BEGfIlN HG Of Tt-tE PROCUCTION PROCESS , .

Thankyou very much for your cooperation.

CDCD<DlD<Dill<Zl

CDCD<DlDCll<ll<Zl

CDCD<Df:OCll<ll<Zl

CD<D<DlDCll<ll<Zl

CD<D<Df:OCll<ll<Zl

CDCI)<D$ Cll<ll<Zl

<ll<D<D$CllIIJ<Zl

References - link.springer.com3A978-3-7908-2690-6%2F1.pdfAnderson J, Gerbing DW (1988) Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological

Documents