Guía docente de Gestión de la Calidad (M56/56/1/20)

• Quality concept and application
• Quality Management implementation in organizations
• Quality Management initiatives
• Quality Management tools
• Lean management
• New lines of research

• Acquire bibliographic information about the current state of the art on business research.
• Understand the relevant theories, trends and debates related to the field.
• Propose and solve research questions in such a way applicable to business strategy.
• Understand the role of Quality management as a competitive variable.
• Recognize the importance of Quality management as an organizational performance variable.
• Situate quality management as inherent part of Operations Management organizational strategy.
• Elaborate proposals based on Quality Management variable related with competitive profile, organizational performance and operations management strategy.

• Quality definition, costs and dimensions
• Historical evolution of Quality Management
• Quality Management gurus
• Lean Management
• ISO standards
• Excellence models
• Quality Management initiatives

• Seminars
• Case studies
• Exercises

• Anderson, J.C., Rungtusanatham, M., Schroeder, R.G. and Devaraj, S. (1995). A path analytic model of a theory of quality management underlying the Deming management method: preliminary empirical findings. Decision sciences, 26(5), 637-658.
• Bou-Llusar, J.C., Escrig-Tena, A.B., Roca-Puig, V. and Beltrán-Martín, I. (2009). An empirical assessment of the EFQM Excellence Model: Evaluation as a TQM framework relative to the MBNQA Model. Journal of operations management, 27(1), 1-22.
• Dean, J. and Bowen, D. (1994). Management theory and total quality: Improving research and practice through theory development. Academy of Management Review, 19(3), 392-418.
• Drohomeretski, E.; Gouvea da Costa, S.; Pinheiro de Lima, E. and da Rosa Garbuio, P. (2014). Lean, Six Sigma and Lean Six Sigma: an analysis based on operations strategy. International Journal of Production Research, 52(3), 804–824.
• Hendricks, K.B. and Singhal, V.R. (2001). Firm characteristics, total quality management, and financial performance. Journal of operations management, 19(3), 269-285.
• Holweg, M. (2007). The genealogy of lean production. Journal of operations management, 25(2), 420-437.
• Kaynak, H. (2003). The relationship between total quality management practices and their effects on firm performance. Journal of Operations Management, 21, 405-435.
• Lee, V.H. and Ooi, K.B. (2015). Applying the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award criteria: An approach to strengthen organisational memory and process innovation. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 26(11-12), 1373-1386.
• Lo, C., Wiengarten, F., Humphreys, P., Yeung, A., Cheng, T. (2013). The impact of contextual factors on the efficacy of ISO 9000 adoption. Journal of Operations Management, 31, 229-235.
• Martínez-Costa, M., Choi, T.Y., Martínez, J.A. and Martínez-Lorente, A. R. (2009). ISO 9000/1994, ISO 9001/2000 and TQM: The performance debate revisited. Journal of Operations Management, 27(6), 495-511.
• Peng, X. and Prybutok, V. (2015). Relative effectiveness of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award categories. International Journal of Production Research, 53(2), 629-647.
• Powell, T. C. (1995). Total quality management as competitive advantage: a review and empirical study. Strategic management journal, 16(1), 15-37.
• Reeves, C. and Bednar, D. (1994). Defining Quality: Alternatives and Implications. Academy of Management Review, 19(3), 419-445.
• Rungtusanatham, M., Forza, C., Filippini, R. and Anderson, J. (1998). A replication study of a theory of quality management underlying the Deming management method: insights from an Italian context. Journal of Operations Management, 11, 77-95.
• Schroeder, R., Linderman, K., Liedtke, C. and Choo, A. (2008). Six Sigma: Definition and underlying theory. Journal of Operations Management, 26, 536-554.
• Shah, R. and Ward, P. (2003). Lean manufacturing: context, practice bundles, and performance. Journal of Operations Management, 21, 129-149.
• Shah, R. and Ward, P. (2007). Defining and developing measures of lean production. Journal of operations management, 25(4), 785-805.
• Shokri, A., Waring, T.S. and Nabhani, F. (2016). Investigating the readiness of people in manufacturing SMEs to embark on Lean Six Sigma projects. International Journal of Operations & Production Management. 36(8), 850-878.
• Swink, M. and Jacobs, B.W. (2012). Six Sigma adoption: Operating performance impacts and contextual drivers of success. Journal of Operations Management, 30(6), 437-453.
• van Schoten, S.; de Blok, C.; Spreeuwenberg, P.; Groenewegen, P. and Wagner C. (2016). The EFQM Model as a framework for total quality management in healthcare: Results of a longitudinal quantitative study. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 36(8), 901-922

• Arias, D. and Minguela, B. (2018). Dirección de la producción y de las operaciones: Decisiones operativas. Editorial Pirámide.
• Dale, B.G. (1999). Managing Quality. Balckwell Business, Oxford.
• Garvin, D.A. (1988). Managing Quality: The Strategic and Competitive Edge. New York: The Free Press.
• Goldberg, R. and Weiss, E.N. (2014). The Lean Anthology: A Practical Primer in Continual Improvement. CRC Press.
• Krajewski, L.J., Ritzman, L.P. and Malhotra, M.K. (2010). Operations management: Processes and supply chains. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson.
• Naidu, N.V.R. (2006): Total Quality Management, New Age International. ProQuest Ebook Central.
• Womack, J.P. and Jones, D.T. (2003). Lean Thinking New York: The Free Press.
• Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T., Roos, D. and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1991). The machine that changed the world: The story of lean production. Harper Collins.

Article 17 of the UGR Assessment Policy and Regulations establishes that the ordinary assessment session (convocatoria ordinaria) will preferably be based on the continuous assessment of students, except for those who have been granted the right to a single final assessment (evaluación única final), which is an assessment method that only takes a final exam into account.

With the purpose of assessing the acquisition of the contents and competencies to develop in the subject, the following assessment procedure will be used, continuous assessment being optional.

• It will be conducted an ongoing evaluation of student training in order to assess (shown in parenthesis the weight of each item in the final assessment):
• The acquisition of skills, aptitudes and knowledge derived from the course through a final exam. The written exam will consist in short questions and/or exercises about the contents studied in the course (50%).
• Active participation in discussion sessions and the degree of interest of the interventions. It will consider the level of student involvement in the subject matter and the degree of ongoing monitoring of the development of the course (10%).
• The resolution of exercises and case studies raised (10%).
• The precision and clarity in exhibitions, seminars and work. It will be necessary to made at least one exhibition per student (20%)
• The positive attitude of students and their involvement in the practical sessions in these areas of work (10%).

Sessions attendance is computed as the percentage of the sessions the student assist (including seminars specific to this subject). Participation is measured by presentations of exercises, press article and answers to quiz during the classes.

Article 19 of the UGR Assessment Policy and Regulations establishes that students who have not passed a course in the ordinary assessment session (convocatoria ordinaria) will have access to an extraordinary assessment session (convocatoria extraordinaria). All students may take part in this extraordinary assessment session, regardless of whether or not they have followed continuous assessment activities. In this way, students who have not carried out continuous assessment activities will have the opportunity to obtain 100% of their mark by means of an exam and/or assignment.

Students who failed or do not realize the assessment of the first call (ongoing evaluation or single final assessment) may realize a special exam. 100% of the grade will correspond to that obtained in a final assessment of the following type:

• Written exam consisting in short questions and/or exercises about the contents studied in the course (100%)

Article 8 of the UGR Assessment Policy and Regulations establishes that students who are unable to follow continuous assessment methods due to justifiable reasons shall have recourse to a single final assessment (evaluación única final), which is an assessment method that only takes a final exam into account.

In order to opt for a single final assessment (evaluación única final), students must send a request, using the corresponding online procedure, to the coordinator of the master’s programme, in the first two weeks of the course or in the two weeks following their enrolment (if the enrolment has taken place after the classes have already begun). The coordinator will communicate this information to the relevant teaching staff members, citing and verifying the reasons why the student is unable to follow the continuous assessment system.

In this case, the assessment will comprise:

• The single final assessment is obtained as 100% of the grade through an assessment of the same type as the special exam described in the previous section.

INCLUSION and DIVERSITY. In the case of students with disabilities or other specific educational support needs (NEAE), the tutoring system will be adapted to these needs, following the recommendations of the inclusion area at the University of Granada. Departments and centers will establish appropriate measures to ensure that tutorials take place in accessible locations. Additionally, at the request of faculty, support can be requested from the competent unit at UGR for special methodological adaptations.