If a company is trying to achieve excellence, it needs to measure for excellence (Laura Struebing, 1996). Excellence is definitely associated with outstanding performance. It was Peters and Waterman in their book “In search of excellence” has introduced the term ‘Excellence’. Focusing on the attributes of performance excellence, Peters and Waterman described 42 of the best-run companies in the USA and tried to provide some general principles that could be applied to any organisation. The eight factors, which they believe contribute to organizational excellence.

If we define Organizational Excellence (OE) as a means of measuring customer’s, employer’s and shareholder’s (stakeholders) satisfaction simultaneously within an organization in order to obtain a comprehensive evaluation of the organizational performance, it becomes clear that knowing what drives the satisfaction of the key organizational stakeholders is the path that leads to success of a business in the future. (Kanji, 2007)

Business Excellence is “excellence” in strategies, business practices, and stakeholder- related performance results that have been validated by assessments based on specific models proven to support the challenging journey towards excellence. The first Business Excellence models were developed in the mid-1980s and came about as a result of the quality movement in the West, which in turn was a response to the advancements in quality and competitiveness in Japan. The models themselves began as quality awards or TQM models. Over time, the term “Business Excellence” started to replace the terms “Quality” and “TQM”. Today, many countries view Business Excellence models as a key mechanism for improving the performance of organizations, as well as national competitiveness. (Andreea et al, 2010).

Major models of Business excellence are discussed in this paper:-

Deming prize model:

In 1951 Deming’s Quality Award is being established in Japan by applying the concept of total quality control (Total Quality Control). This Japanese model is not sufficiently transparent by itself. The checklist for assessment while applying the Japanese model for Deming’s award follows the following criteria: determining of corporate policy, assessment of the work organization and administration, practicing of education and dissemination of knowledge.

In addition, the following items are being assessed: Management of the profits, Cost management, Management providers, Management of production processes, Management of primary and current assets, Management of measuring equipment, Human Resource Management, Definition of labour relations, Educational programs, The development of new products, Management research, Relationship with the vendors, Procedures for resolving complaints, grievances, Use information from customers, Quality Assurance, Service for customers / users, Relationship with the customer.

Application of the Deming’s circle includes special assessments that should show how the system relates to: - The collection and use of information for quality, Making analyses, The introduction of the standardization, Management processes, Quality assurance, How the system applies in practice, The effects of the impact of TQC (Total Quality Control) upon the quality, service, delivery, costs, profits, The future - if there is a plan for achieving TQC program.

Malkolm Baldrige (MB) or American Model for Business Excellence

In 1987, the model initiated by U.S. was used as the basis for winning the national Malkolm Baldrige (MB) Quality Award .The prize is traditionally awarded each year by the President of the USA at a special ceremony in Washington. The award is being given as an annual tribute to the American companies for excellence performance of their products / services.

Criteria for performance excellence under this model are:-

Leadership:

What does the establishment of the system of leadership denote, (values, expectations and the company's social responsibility),

Strategic Planning:

Effectiveness of strategic and business planning, development or performance plans by focusing on customer’s and operational performance requirements,

Focus on customers and market:

The way in which companies determine the requirements and expectations of customers and market, but also the way in which they established the relationships and assess their satisfaction,

Information and analysis:

Effectiveness of the information and analysis in the direction of achieving excellence and market success,

Human resources development and management:

Performance in an effort to create a full human potential that will enable the creation of high-performance organization,

Management processes:

Effectiveness of the system and processes for ensuring the quality of products / services,

Business results:

Trend results and performance comparison with competitors in key business areas (customer satisfaction, finance and market products and services, human resources, suppliers, partners, and operations). (Elizabeta et al, 2013)

Ionica et al., 2010 wrote the most popular and influential model in the western world is the one launched by the US government called the Malcolm Baldrige Award Model (also commonly known as the Baldrige model, the Baldrige criteria, or The Criteria for Performance Excellence). The Baldrige model provides a systems perspective for understanding performance management and reflects validated, leading-edge management practices against which an organization can measure itself.

EFQM-model or The European Business Excellence model:

Fourteen well-known CEO’s, presiding over companies such as Renault, Fiat, Philips, British Telecom, KLM and Ciba Geigy founded the European Foundation for Quality Management. They studied the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award criteria, which had been successfully introduced in the United States by that time. Together with a small team of experts, the CEOs developed a European framework, now known as the EFQM-model, or officially, the European Business Excellence model of 1989. The EFQM model includes nine areas, Five Enablers and four results. Five enablers are-Leadership, Policy and Strategy, People, Partnerships and resources, Processes. Four results include-1) People result,2) Customer result,3) Society result,4) Key performance results. EFQM model is also used as an instrument for self-evaluation and as a management organization tool, linking the mission/vision, corporate strategy, critical success factors and measurement systems, such as the Business Balanced Score Card. (Hardjono and Marcel, 2001)

Figure:-2

The EFQM Excellence Model, Source; – EFQM website: http://www.efqm.org/welco.htm

The EFQM Excellence Model is a practical tool that offers several advantages from the empirical research perspective, as do other Quality Awards:

The model is regularly revised and updated, incorporating the contributions of EFQM consultants. Therefore, the set of constructs underlying the model is not limited to a single researcher’s view of TQM, which also guarantees its comprehensiveness, dynamism and tracking of the latest developments in TQM. It provides an extensive set of sub-criteria to detail the exact meaning of each criterion. This facilitates the items’ identification in the scale development. Additionally, award models are intended to be instruments for comparing an organization with its competitors in order to achieve and/or maintain competitive advantage. When survey data based on these models is provided to the firms, the self-assessment of TQM implementation and the identification of areas for improvement in relation to the firm’s closest competitors is substantially facilitated, which increases the practical implications of the research. The EFQM Excellence Model has obvious prestige among European firms as a sound quality standard and there is an ever-increasing number of firms involved in the recognition process to achieve the European Quality Award (EQA) (EFQM, 2006). As this happens, the benchmarking utility of the model increases. ( Vijande and Gonzalez, 2007) They further stated that:- a) adopting the EFQM Excellence Model contributes to firms outperforming competition, i.e., the achievement of competitive advantage; b) there is no concern regarding its universal usability within the European context; and c) it represents the next step to be taken by all European firms committed to quality management in order to surpass the Quality Assurance stage.

The use of this standard model facilitates the use of a much simpler design process, and enables the “benchmark” comparison of Business Excellence Model outputs in the entire universe of organizations using the tool. But its original design as a diagnostic tool raises serious doubts about its effectiveness as a strategic management tool. (Shulver and Lawrie, 2007). Factors related to improved worker participation, group work, motivation and communication are essential for the successful adoption of EFQM model and the obstacles mentioned by the organizations using EFQM model are lack of resources and the time and training to work with the EFQM model. (Saizarbitoria et al, 2011). Doeleman et al, 2013 mentioned the strength of EFQM excellence model as it differentiates result criteria and enabler criteria because of which it can be used in Management Control System by defining key success factors, performance indicators, targets and enabling actions. They also mentioned that the model requires shared commitments and aims, and delivers a common language as a vital element of a learning organization. They further wrote:- The use of the model improves an organization’s results, The model offers room for idiosyncratic interpretations and is mainly descriptive, Consensus can be reached with the aid of the model over the diagnosis and possible, Improvements; and this reveals potential sources of competitive advantage, The model creates the possibility of integrating the organization’s development into the management control cycle, The model has proven to be an effective tool for comparison and benchmarking purposes, both between and within organizations, The focus on the relationships among the criteria contributes to coherent organizational development, A participative approach in the model’s application promotes commitment to the arrangements and thereby the realization of the intended improvements, Intrinsic motivation is a precondition for successful implementation, Leadership is an important driving force of quality improvement and for the effective implementation of the EFQM Excellence Model.

The Australian Business Excellence Framework

The Australian Business Excellence Framework (ABEF) is an integrated leadership and management system that describes the elements essential to organizations sustaining high levels of performance. It can be used to assess and improve any aspect of an organization, including leadership, strategy and planning, people, information and knowledge, safety, service delivery, product quality and bottom-line results. BEF is based on enduring principles of organizational improvement that are interpreted according to individual business settings using seven ‘Categories’ and seventeen sub-categories, or ‘Items’. The seven business settings (Categories) are the following: Information and knowledge; leadership; customer and market focus; strategy and planning; people; process management, improvement and innovation; success and sustainability. (Ionică et al, 2010)

The Australian framework is built around eight business excellence principles; –

1. Lead by example, provide clear direction, build organizational alignment and focus on sustainable achievement of goals.

2. Understand what markets and customers value, now and into the future, and use this to drive organizational design, strategy, products and services.

3. Continuously improve the system.

4. Develop and value people’s capability and release their skills, resourcefulness and creativity to change and improve the organization.

5. Develop agility, adaptability and responsiveness based on a culture of continual improvement, innovation and learning.

6. Improve performance through the use of data, information and knowledge to understand variability and to improve strategic and operational decision-making.

7. Behave in an ethically, socially and environmentally responsible manner.

8. Focus on sustainable results, value and outcomes. (http://www.bpir.com/total-quality-management-business-excellence-models-bpir.com.html)

“The 4P” model:

Dahlgaard-Park and Dahlgaard (1999) suggested a model of organizational excellence, called “the 4P” model, in which the people dimension is recognized and emphasized as the primary enabler. According to the model building quality or excellence into the following 4P develops Organizational Excellence (OE): 1. People, 2. Partnership/ Teams, 3. Processes of work, 4.Products / service products. (Dahlgaard and Dahlgaard, 2008)

Figure 3

Source; - Dahlgaard and Dahlgaard, 2008

This model suggests that the basis for achieving the organizational excellence is to have excellent people, led by the leaders. Excellence people create the excellent partnership that creates excellence processes and products. This all elements together are the basis for defining the characteristics of excellent organization, which over time can become a foundation for building excellent communities and societies i.e., excellent world (Lisiecka and Gwiazda, 2012).

Kanji’s Business Excellence model:

Kanji’s Business Excellence model (1998) emphasis on TQM principles, inclusion of critical success factors and model validation. Kanji’s Pyramid model (1996) is translated into a structural model of business excellence. Kanji’s model consists of four principles: delight the customer; management by fact; people-based management; and continuous improvement. Each principle is divided into two core concepts, that is: customer satisfaction and internal customers are real; all work is process and measurement; teamwork and people make quality; continuous improvement cycle and prevention. Leadership serves as a prime which must be transmitted through all the principles and core concepts to achieve business excellence. Kanji’s Business Excellence model is an improvement model because it performs simultaneous computation of mathematical equations of factor relationships to obtain factor indices and business excellence indices which allow organizations to compare themselves against the different organizations with whom they are competing (Kanji and Wong, 1999).

Unlike other Business Excellence model Kanji’s Business Excellence model is not one of any national quality awards (NQAs). Kanji developed a pyramid model and explained the principle of total quality management (TQM). He improved the pyramid model to be the KBEM. KBEM is also developed together with a measurement system in order to use as the measurement tool or the assessment tool when an organization applies the KBEM to improve its organizational performances. Kanji developed Kanji’s Business Excellence Index. KBEI is an index that used to represent how excellence an organization has been reached according to the results from the questionnaire together with advance statistical calculation. Furthermore, Kanji also developed an approach which can be used to determine which improvement on each criterion will have the greatest influences to the overall result of the BEI. This approach is called Excellence Seeker’s Approach. In KBEM, measurement standard is also important in measuring organizational performances. However, the standard of the measurement system of KBEM is different from other BEMs and NQAs. In KBEM, each criterion has equally weighting which means all criteria of the KBEM are equally important from Leadership to BE of the KBEM. In Kanji’s model the BEI or KBEI is a single index number from 0 to 100. In order to calculate the BEI, Structural Equation Model (SEM) was applied with the content of critical success factors, latent variables and the path coefficients among each two criteria. All parameters will be put in the SEM and further calculated BEI scores by using the partial least squares (PLSs) method. This method includes a lot of regression analysis. Once BEI scores have been calculated, the organization can make use of these BEIs by using them to plan which criteria need to be improved.

The measurement system of KBEM has achieved wide acceptance among practitioners. Complexity of the process in the measurement system of KBEM and lacking of participation of people in organization in improving organizational performances are the two deficiencies of the measurement system of KBEM. . Lot of resources: money, time, and people are needed in solving these complex calculations. According to the measurement system of KBEM, all calculation processes were based on advanced statistical calculations and methods: SEMs, PLS and other regressions. Therefore, in order to calculate all parameters required in the processes, it is difficult to get the result. If an organization would like to solve these calculations, it wastes the time and resources of the organization. Even though these calculations can be done by normal statistical software, specialists are needed to process these calculations. In addition, Kanji (2001) also proposed a software package in order to solve the entire processes of the measurement system of KBEM. This software is called KW management package (Songsithipornchai and Jang, 2012).

Songsithipornchai and Jang, 2012, proposed a Ranking-Based Kanji’s Business Excellence Measurement Model to solve these problems.

The ranking-based Kanji’s business excellence measurement model is a five steps measurement model from collecting sources of information to evaluating the improvement of the organizational performances. Five steps of the ranking-based Kanji’s business excellence measurement model are:-

Step I: Gathering Information

In this step, KBEM questionnaire will be distributed to the prospective people or organizations.

Step II: Sorting the Mean Scores of All Criteria

After collecting information from the distributed questionnaire in Step I, the performance mean scores for each criterion will be calculated. Then, all score will be ranked in order. To be easier for finding area to be improved, all ranked order numbers will be put in the structural model of the KBEM.

Step III: Analyzing and Exploring the Area to be improved

By using the ranked order number and the characteristic of causal relationship of the KBEM, area to be improved can be analyzed and explored. Since the KBEM is a cause-effect BEM, performances between causes and effects are related. In order to determine area to be improved, significant differences between the ranked order numbers of each pair of cause and effect criteria will be explored. Differences between the ranked order numbers of each pair of cause and effect criteria will be marked as the significant difference when the ranked order numbers are over the pre-described difference gap. Once area to be improved was determined, priority of the significant differences will be arranged. This represents what improvement should be made in which order.

Step VI: Discussing and Discovering of the Improvement Techniques

Discussion among people who work closed to sources or problems of area to be improved would help the organization to find the appropriate methods to improve that organization performance. People whose work related to the problem or people who have idea of improvement also need to be included in the discussion group. After getting the solution from the discussion, the implementation of that area to be improved should be implemented.

Step V: Checking and Evaluating the Performances

Steps of the ranking-based Kanji’s business excellence measurement model can be repeated when the organization would like to improve its organizational performances.

Under this measurement model, not so much resources are needed as it uses only a simple ranking method to discover the area to be improved for organizational performances. There is no complex statistical calculation needed to be adapted as the original measurement system of the KBEM. This measurement model emphasizes on the involvement of people in the organization.

(Songsithipornchai and Jang, 2012) also discussed about the Tools of the Use of the Ranking- Based Kanji’s Business Excellence Measurement Model. In order to utilize the steps of the ranking-based Kanji’s business excellence measurement model, there are two main tools need to be deployed. The first tool is the Kanji’s business excellence questionnaire which was chosen to be the source of information for the ranking-based Kanji’s business excellence measurement model. There are 59 statements in total. The questionnaire ranges from two to seven statements to assess the performance of each criterion in the KBEM.

The other tool to be deployed in the ranking-based Kanji’s business excellence measurement model is the structural model of KBEM. Since the structural model of KBEM showed the relationship in cause-effect of the criteria in the KBEM, it can be used in the ranking-based Kanji’s business excellence measurement model. The structural model of KBEM is utilized in the step II and step III of the ranking-based Kanji’s business excellence measurement model in determining area to be improved of the organizational performances. The ranked order number of each corresponding criteria will be put on top of the structural model of KBEM to help to determine the area to be improved. (Songsithipornchai and Jang, 2012)

Some writers suggested that Quality Award models are suitable for small companies and they fall short of describing how they could be actually used. Kanji’s model represents an attractive and practical model for companies to follow. The implementation approach is more inclined towards problem solving and improvement. Kanji’s Pyramid model is the first to provide a systematic way to implement TQM. (Mohd Yusuf and Aspinwall, 2000).

Table 1- Literature study

SI No	Author name and Journal	Article title	Measurement Model	Outcome
1	Maria Leticia Santos-Vijande, Luis I. Alvarez-Gonzalez, Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management , Volume 2, Issue 2, 2007	TQM and firms performance: An EFQM excellence model research based survey	EFQM excellence model (1992)	Researchers found positive causal relationship between the EFQM’s Enablers and firms’ Results. Researchers concluded that adopting EFQM Excellence Model contributes to firms outperforming competition and it has universal usability within the European context.
2	Ozkan Tutuncu, Deniz Kucukusta, Total Quality Management Vol. 18, No. 10, 1083–1096, December 2007	Relationship between Organizational Commitment and EFQM Business Excellence Model: A Study on Turkish Quality Award Winners	EFQM excellence model	Authors formulated following three hypothesis for the study:-H1: There is a correlation between OC and BEM, H2: BEM components are perceived as more important than OC components, H3: Affective commitment is perceived more important among other OC dimensions. Following were the findings-1) There is a high correlation between OC and BEM, 2) BEM variables are perceived more important than the OC variables, 3) Affective commitment is perceived to be more meaningful on the road to business excellence.
3	Presented by Dd. Dipl.-Vw. Malte Kaufmann, The Berlin International Economics Congress 2012, March 7th-10th, 2012	The impact of corporate social responsibility on business performance – can it be measured, and if so, how?	EFQM model	It was found by the author that the EFQM model provides guidelines regarding how much weight should be given to different “enablers” and “results” criteria within the overall performance measurement. Thus it provides an ideal framework for the measurement of CSR activities and their influence on Business Performance. They further concluded that to measure the impact of CSR on business performance indirectly, it is necessary to measure changes in stakeholder satisfaction levels due to investments in Corporate Social Responsibility.
4	H.J. Doeleman, S. ten Have and C.T.B. Ahaus , Total Quality Management and Business Excellence (2013):	Empirical evidence on applying the European Foundation for Quality Management Excellence Model, a literature review	EFQM model	Authors tried to find out empirical evidence that performance is enhanced through interventions in the criteria of the EFQM Excellence Model. They concluded that the use of the model improves an organization’s results, the model has proven to be an effective tool for comparison and benchmarking purposes, both between and within organisations and. Leadership is an important driving force of quality improvement and for the effective implementation of the EFQM Excellence Model.
5	Su Mi Dahlgaard-Park 1and Jens J. Dahlgaard2,	A Strategy for Building Sustainable Innovation Excellence-A Danish Study	4P model	Researchers concluded that “4P” model shows a valid structure or strategy for building sustainable organizational and innovation excellence.
6	Prof. Alan Brown, Nang Yan Business Journal – 1.1 – 2012	Challenges to Business Excellence: Some empirical evidence	Australian Business Excellence model	Author found out that organizations experienced more challenges with the Strategy. Three issues have been identified in this area, i.e., the process of developing strategy, strategy communication and engagement of people with strategy. Challenges are identified in the areas of leadership and people. No major challenges were identified in the process area.
7	ERDOGAN KOC, Total Quality Management Vol. 17, No. 7, 857–877, September 2006	Total Quality Management and Business Excellence in Services: The Implications of All-Inclusive Pricing System on Internal and External Customer Satisfaction in the Turkish Tourism Market	Business Excellence (Kanji, 1998) and SERVQUAL (Parasuraman et al., 1988) models	Authors concluded that an effective system to ensure customer satisfaction and loyalty could be established through Kanji’s (2002) TQM and Business Excellence Model which would allow tourism firms to continuously monitor and improve their performances while reducing their costs. They also used the SERVQUAL model offered by Parasuraman et al.’s (1988) for the evaluation of the service quality.
8	GOPAL K. KANJI1 and ALFRED WONG2 TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT, VOL. 10, NO. 8, 1999, 1147± 1168	Business Excellence model for supply chain management	Kanji’s Business Excellence model	Authors selected Kanji’s Business Excellence model to find out the inadequacies of the existing SCM models and to create a new structured model for SCM. They found out that there should be room for improvement in communication with suppliers and involving suppliers in the value creation activities of the companies. They came out with the new SCM model which reflected that the `soft’ factors, i.e. customer focus and cooperative relationship have more statistically significant relationships with business excellence than the `hard’ factors, i.e. information management, integrated process or the construct of management by fact.
9	Gurhan Uysal, Journal of US-China Public Administration, ISSN 1548-6591 April 2012, Vol. 9, No. 4, 451-457	Total Quality Management Awards: Performance Acquisition	Malcolm Baldrige Quality Award, European Quality Award (EFQM), Deming Prize	Author concluded that the Baldrige aims to achieve organizational performance via business results; EFQM aims to achieve business excellence; Deming Prize aims to achieve organizational quality. The study recommended Deming Prize as it increases organizational quality inside the firms.
10	J.Dodangeh, M.Y. Rosnah, N.Ismail, Y.Md.Ismail, M.R.Biekzadeh, J.Jassbi, technics technologies education management, Vol 7, No 3, 2012	A Review on Major Business Excellence Frameworks	Malcolm Baldrige Quality Award, European Quality Award (EFQM), Deming Prize	Authors concluded that no framework provides outstanding opportunities for business excellence.

CONCLUSION:

EFQM excellence model, Malcolm Baldrige Quality Award, 4P model, Deming Prize model, Australian Business Excellence model and Kanji’s Business Excellence model are the models discussed in this paper. Deming prize focus on quality control and assurance, production process and statistical quality control, if the organization focuses on TQM they can go for Deming Prize model. Baldridge Award focus on human resources development and management and customer satisfaction, EFQM focuses on several areas like leadership, policy and strategy, human resources management, partnerships and resources, processes, customer result, human resources result, society result and key performance result, The purpose of 4P model is to build quality into people as the essential foundation for improving partnerships, processes and products which will lead to excellence, Australian Business Excellence Framework (ABEF) assure sustainable performance by helping to asses and improve many aspects of an organization, Kanji’s Business Excellence model has been formulated with the purpose of helping the organizations to measure their performance.

Out of the above discussed models of excellence, apart from Kanji’s model all others are NQA (National Quality Award) models which can be used as a self assessment tool by organizations. But there is no clarity about the implementation of these models. KBEM which is not an NQA model is intended for the measurement of performance from the internal stakeholders’ point of view with clarity in implementation.

REFERENCES:

1. Andreea Ionică, Virginia Băleanu, Eduard Edelhauser, Sabina Irimie (2010), TQM and Business Excellence, Annals of the University Of Petroşani, Economics, 10(4), 125-134.

2. Chi-Kuang Chen Sarasin Songsithipornchai, Jiun-Yi Jang (2012), Does Kanji’s Business Excellence Model Work Well? A Study from the Measurement Aspect, Proceedings of the Asia Pacific Industrial Engineering and Management Systems Conference.

3. Dd. Dipl.-Vw. Malte Kaufmann (2012), the impact of corporate social responsibility on business performance- can it be measured, If so, how? The Berlin International Economics Congress 2012, March 7th-10th.

4. Elizabeta Mitreva1, Nako Taskov1, Vladimir Kitanov1, Oliver Filiposki1 and Tatjana Dzaleva (2013), Models of TQM Strategy in the World and the Need for Macedonian Model of Excellence, Int. J. Pure Appl. Sci. Technol., 16(1) pp. 69-79.

5. Gopal K Kanji and Alfred Wong, Business Excellence Model for supply chain management (1999), Total Quality Management, Vol. 10, No. 8, 1147 1168.

6. Gurhan Uysal (April 2012), Total Quality Management Awards: Performance acquisition, Journal of US-China Public Administration, ISSN 1548-6591 , Vol. 9, No. 4, 451-457

7. H.J. Doeleman, S. ten Have and C.T.B. Ahaus (2013), Empirical evidence on applying the European Foundation for Quality Management Excellence Model, a literature review, Total Quality Management and Business Excellence.

8. Heras-Saizarbitoria, Inaki, Casadesus, Martí and Marimon, Frederic (2011), The impact of ISO 9001 standard and the EFQM model: The view of the assessors, Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 22: 2, 197-218.

9. http://www.bpir.com/total-quality-management-business-excellence-models-bpir.com.html

10. Ionica, A.; Băleanu, V.; Edelhauser, E.; Irimie, S. (2010), TQM and Business Excellence, Annals of the University of Petroşani, Economics, 10(4), 125-134.

11. J. Dodangeh, M.Y. Rosnah, N.I smail, Y. Md. Ismail, M.R. Biekzadeh, J. Jassbi (2012), A Review on Major Business Excellence Frameworks, techniques Technologies Education Management, Vol 7, No 3

12. Krystyna Lisiecka; Ewa Czyż-Gwiazda (2012), Quality Management A Way To Business Excellence, Socio-economic Research Bulletin, Issue 3 (46), p. 1.

13. Laura Struebing (December 1996), assistant editor, Quality Progress, Measuring for Excellence.

14. Maria Leticia Santos-Vijande, Luis I. Alvarez-Gonzalez (2007), TQM and firms performance: An EFQM excellence model research based survey, Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management , Volume 2, Issue 2.

15. Michael Shulver and Gavin Lawrie ( 2007), The Balanced Scorecard and the Business Excellence Model, Working Paper presented at the European Institute for Advanced Studies in Management, 8th Manufacturing Accounting Research Conference: “Cost and Performance in Services and Operations” held at University of Trento, June 18-20.

16. Ozkan Tutuncu, Deniz Kucukusta (December, 2007), Relationship between Organizational commitment and EFQM excellence model: a study on Turkish Quality award winners, Vol. 18, No. 10, 1083–1096.

17. Prof. Alan Brown (2012), Challenges to Business Excellence: some empirical evidence, Nang Yan Business Journal – 1.1.

18. Prof. Gopal K Kanji (2007), Performance Measurement: A System Approach for Excellence. Kanji quality Culture Ltd, Sheffield Technology Parks , Arundel Street, Sheffield, S1 2NS, UK

19. Shari Mohd Yusuf and Elaine Aspinwall (2000), Total Quality Management implementation frameworks: comparison and review, Total Quality Management, Volume 11, Number 3.

20. Su Mi Dahlgaard-Park and Jens J. Dahlgaard (2008), A Strategy for Building Sustainable Innovation Excellence-A Danish Study, corporate sustainability as a challenge for comprehensive management, contributions to management science, 2008

21. Teun W. Hardjono and Marcel van Marrewijk (2001), The Social Dimensions of Business Excellence, Corporate Environmental Strategy, Vol. 8, No. 4.

Received on 07.05.2015 Modified on 25.06.2015

Asian J. Management. 2016; 7(3): 236-244.

DOI: 10.5958/2321-5763.2016.00036.6