The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0968-4883.

htm

QAE 16,1

36
Received 9 February 2007 Revised July 2007 Accepted 30 October 2007

Designing a supply chain management academic curriculum using QFD and benchmarking
Marvin E. Gonzalez, Gioconda Quesada, Kent Gourdin and Mark Hartley
College of Charleston, Charleston, South Carolina, USA
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to utilize quality function deployment (QFD), Benchmarking analyses and other innovative quality tools to develop a new customer-centered undergraduate curriculum in supply chain management (SCM). Design/methodology/approach The researchers used potential employers as the source for data collection. Then, they used QFD and benchmarking to develop a Voice of Customer matrix. Using information from the matrix, a new customer-oriented SCM undergraduate programme was designed. Findings The researchers outline a practical solution to the problem of designing academic programmes which satisfy the main expectations of potential employers (customers). Research limitations/implications The study is specically concerned with the design of an SCM curriculum, but the researchers argue that the design methodology could be applied in other academic contexts. Practical implications The application of QFD and benchmarking as a joint analysis tool is an interesting approach in education because the information is analysed from different perspectives simultaneously. The new programme successfully meets customer/employer expectations and requirements. Originality/value This study demonstrates the effective application of quality design tools to enhance academic programmes. The approach can clearly be extended to other areas for the design of specic courses and programmes. The most important needs in programme design are those of identifying the programmes main customers and of clarifying their expectations. Keywords Quality, Customers, Higher education, Quality function deployment, Benchmarking, Supply chain management Paper type Research paper

Quality Assurance in Education Vol. 16 No. 1, 2008 pp. 36-60 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0968-4883 DOI 10.1108/09684880810848404

Introduction Over the last 12 years, the concept of logistics management has been developed within a broader discipline of supply chain management. This new eld involves all approaches used to efciently integrate all participants of a supply chain so that products/services are delivered to the customer in the right quantities, to the right location, at the right time, and at optimal cost (Gonzalez et al., 2004). Scholars, along with practitioners, are continuously developing philosophies and tools to overcome the risks inherent in the current changing environment. The evolution of this concept is driven by the competitive global market place, where providing very high levels of efciency and customer service are prerequisites to success (Rutner and Fawcett, 2005).

A few decades ago, total quality management arose as a philosophy that proposed the integration of functional areas in the organization for a common goal: customer satisfaction (Quesada, 1999). Firms started to think about their suppliers as strategic partners and began involving them in the strategic planning process (Ellram and Carr, 1994). Just a few years ago, both academic and practitioner communities were shifting paradigms regarding supply chain management. After years of viewing the organization as a single rm, they increasingly view them as one member of a network of suppliers and customers, comprising a supply chain (Leenders et al., 1994; Harland, 1996; Choon et al., 2002). However, this paradigm shift must be supported by the academic institutions that must prepare those future leaders who will eventually have the responsibility for achieving higher standards in supply chain issues in both the services and manufacturing areas. Therefore, it is the purpose of this research to determine the customer expectations and needs such that supply chain management academic programme can be developed to satisfy them. In order to design an undergraduate academic programme in the area of supply chain management the authors consider the principles of total quality management (TQM). The major tool employed is Quality Function Deployment (QFD). QFD has found widespread acceptance in USA industry as an effective tool to translate customer expectations into product or service features. In this approach, several steps are followed to expose customer expectations into the service process and ensure that at each level of expectation the highest possible quality is provided. QFD is simply a planning tool; it begins with market research that identies just what customers like, information hereafter referred to as Voice of the Customer (VOC). It is through the QFD process that the VOC is translated into system requirements (operational requirements). Since QFD is a relatively new process, almost all applications have been in industry or manufacturing. In this article, QFD principles will be applied to study undergraduate education. A discussion of the methodology and principles of QFD may be found in Hauser and Clausing (1988); Gonzalez et al. (2004); Akao and Mazur (2003); Gonzalez et al. (2005). This paper contributes to the literature by showing the innovative use of total quality management tools such as Quality Function Deployment (QFD)/Benchmarking and Customer Windows Quadrant (CWQ). The authors show how these tools can be used to incorporate customer expectations into the development of an academic programme. Also they present an analysis of considerations to be used in the implementation of an undergraduate academic programme in supply chain management. The authors begin with a review of the theoretical framework of the paper and then identify customer expectations and the deployment of alternatives for satisfying these expectations. The data received from potential employers indicate they have unique requirements that are not being satised by existing undergraduate programmes in supply chain management. The research objectives are twofold, namely: (1) to develop a methodology for the design of a customer-focused undergraduate academic program in supply chain management using Quality Function Deployment (QFD); and (2) to dene a customer-based improvement strategy based on the critical elements identied by quality analyses.

SCM academic curriculum

37

QAE 16,1

38

Literature review Previous studies in academic or practitioner literature (Adkins and Radtke, 2004; Clayson and Haley, 2005; Lynne and Brennan, 2007; Hwarng and Teo, 2001) and surveys with professionals, students (graduate and undergraduate) and potential employers have indicated that higher education programmes have several problems: First, these programmes tend to emphasize theoretical models that are hard for students to apply as real decision making tools. Next, schools fail to understand real-life problems and incorporate them into supply chain curricula. Finally, oral and written communication skills are not adequately covered; institutions of higher education can develop academic programmes that resolve these, as well as other customer expectations. Quality function deployment Quality function deployment (QFD) was developed in Japan during the 1960s by Akao (1972) as a method for incorporating consumers demands into product development. Akao and Mazur (2003) dened QFD as a method for dening design qualities that are in keeping with customer expectations and then translating those customer expectations into design targets and critical quality assurance points that can be used throughout the production/service development phase. QFD is a widely used systematic process utilized by cross-functional teams to identify and resolve issues arising from the provision of products, processes, services, and strategies intended to enhance customer satisfaction Gonzalez et al. (2003). By employing QFD, manufacturers and service providers are able to translate customer expectations into measurable quality characteristics and create products and services which satisfy those requirements Hauser and Clausing (1988). Quality function deployment (QFD) is a methodology for the development or deployment of features, attributes, or functions that give a product or service high quality. QFD can be very helpful in answering the question how to deliver quality products and services based on the needs of customers, or the voices of customers? (Hwarng and Teo, 2001). The two fundamental purposes of QFD are: (1) to improve the communication of customer expectations throughout the organization; and (2) to improve the completeness of specications and to make them traceable directly to customer expectations and needs (Gonzalez, 2001). Several researchers have applied QFD to different service areas (Jeong and Oh, 1998; Trappey et al., 1996; Stuart and Tax, 1996; Cadogan et al., 1999; Pun et al., 2000; Peters, 1988; Gonzalez et al., 2003, 2005). Since the early 1990s, there have been a number of QFD applications in the education area, as can be seen in Table I. From these, the most related to this paper are: one case for an undergraduate statistics course (Duffuaa et al. 2003) and another one for the development of courses in higher education (Hwarng and Teo, 2001). However, it was originally used in product development and design. Grifn et al. (1995) have considered that QFD provides a means of communication among product life cycle stages. Benets which arise from these and other reported QFD applications include lower design and service costs, fewer and earlier design changes, reduced product development time, fewer start-up problems, better company performance, more reliable input for marketing strategies, improved service quality

Author Clayton (1993) Jaraiedi and Ritz (1994) Lam and Zhao (1998) Motwani et al. (1996)

Research Findings Used QFD coupled with process analysis to provide cost-effective, high-quality lifelong learning for optometrists-to-be at Aston University Applied QFD to explore ways to improve advising and teaching processes at West Virginia University Use QFD matrix to evaluate the effectiveness of teaching at the Department of Management Science at the City University of Hong Kong Use the three-house approach using American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) accreditation requirements as key considerations for designing the MBA programme at Grand Valley State University Used QFD to evaluate their MBA programme by measuring customer satisfaction Used QFD principles and software to prioritize their planning objectives for developing engineering laboratories at the University of Missouri-Rolla Used QFD in conjunction with AHP to identify general design requirements for the Industrial Engineering programme at the Middle East Technical University Used QFD to address customer expectations in the design of engineering curricula at the University of Cincinnati Used QFD principles to identify broad categories of processes relevant to quality characteristics Used the VOC to improve the curriculum development process at the University of Portsmouth Applied QFD in research strategic planning Used QFD principles to highlight potential improvements to the engineering and technical education in Taiwan Analyzed the design requirements needed to satisfy each group of customers at the Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison Developed a curriculum in manufacturing using TQM tools Application of QFD in Distance Learning Education The curriculum of the Tyre Technology Department at the Kocaeli University Kosekoy Vocational School of Higher Education (KU-KVSHE) has been reviewed by using the quality function deployment (QFD) technique QFD application in the improvement of higher education

SCM academic curriculum

39

Pitman et al. (1995) Koksal and Alpay (1998) Koksal and Alpay (1998) Krishnan and Houshmand (1993) Owlia and Aspinwall (1998) Seow and Moody (1996) Chen and Bullington (1993) Chang and Ku (1995) Ermer (1995) Rosenkrantz (1996) Murgatroyd (1993) Ayse and Veli (2005)

Akao et al. (1996)

Table I. Literature review in QFD applications for higher education

and, above all, increased customer satisfaction (Jae et al., 1998; Franceschini and Rossetto, 1995). The researchers, however, found a lack of quantitative tools that could add reliability and efciency to the gathering of customer expectations and their subsequent translation into the critical elements of an academic institution, mainly in the higher education eld. Furthermore, in 100 percent of the current higher education cases, the customers are students (graduate or undergraduate) yet all the academic programmes are based on the faculty experience. As stated before, in the current study the customers will be the potential employers, not the students. Using QFD

QAE 16,1

methodology, the nal processes/methods will produce the service that meets the original customer expectations (employers expectations). Benchmarking Benchmarking is a continuous quality improvement process by which an organization can assess its internal strengths and weaknesses, evaluate comparative advantages of leading competitors, identify best practices of industry functional leaders, and incorporate these ndings into a strategic action plan geared to gain a position of superiority (Hokey et al., 1997). Benchmarking can be dened as a process of comparison of some measure of actual performance against a reference or benchmark performance. There are three main aspects to the performance of a company: efciency, productivity and quality. Benchmark results are used to identify, quantify and prioritize improvement opportunities offering the greatest potential return, while highlighting areas at risk due to under-spending. The end result is a factual basis and context for creating a business plan to drive change (Hokey et al., 1997). Benchmarking may be a one-off event, but is often treated as a continuous process in which companies continually seek to challenge their practices Benchmarking has two distinctive approaches: competitive benchmarking and process benchmarking. According to the American Productivity and Quality Centre, competitive benchmarking aims to measure organizational performance relative to the performance of competing organizations and consists of an ordered sequence of steps, (Hokey et al., 1997) Benchmarking is not complicated but it does seem initially difcult for organizations to learn from others and complete exercises successfully in order to deliver measurable improvements. Based on the researchers experience, often the difculties seem to have less to do with the technique of benchmarking than the pressures the organization and individuals are experiencing and their lack of a coherent plan for integrating change management. Additionally, benchmarking facilitates strategic planning, providing a clearer focus for setting strategic company goals. While competitor benchmarking encourages an external focus, many authors (Rogers, 1993; Andersen and Camp, 1995; Whymark, 1998; Woodburn, 1999) emphasize the particular benets of generic benchmarking in focusing on strategic company goals and thus increasing competitiveness. The shift in emphasis from comparison of direct competitor performance measures to one of learning about best practices and identifying what can be achieved (Rogers, 1993; Andersen and Camp, 1995; Whymark, 1998; Woodburn, 1999) has further enhanced the role of benchmarking in achieving sustainable competitive advantage and superior performance. Furthermore, Porter (1994) recognized the stimulus for change generated by benchmarking activities and the potential gains possible for all stakeholder groups , while Schmidt (1992) examined the link between benchmarking and an increase in shareholder value. We used benchmarking in our paper to compare the new program obtained in the QFD process with the top programs in supply chain management according to Rutner and Fawcett (2005) and to analyze the competitiveness of in todays academic market. Research methodology The general method proposed for the design of a supply chain management academic curriculum using QFD and Benchmarking is depicted in Figure 1. The road map for

40

SCM academic curriculum

41

Figure 1. Road map in the design of a supply chain management academic curriculum using QFD and benchmarking

developing the supply chain management academic curriculum (the authors call this process the development of academic strategy) is composed of three different phases. Phase 1 includes the procedure that the research group used to collect the initial information on customers expectations. Phase 2 includes the QFD and Benchmarking construction in the Voice of Customer matrix. In this phase the research group developed the planning matrix of QFD that was used as a base for the formulation of the academic program under study. Phase 3, is the development of the academic program at the College of Charleston and includes the critical parts and action plans matrices. Each of these phases is explained in detail below. Phase 1: gathering and analysis of the information In this phase the researchers collected and analyzed the customer expectations from potential employers. In order to obtain these customer expectations, a questionnaire was distributed among a selected group of companies that hire professionals in the area of supply chain management and logistics. The researchers used the database of the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) for this initial sample. In addition, they used interviews with purchasing managers, plant managers and logistics managers (the research group named them as informants). Multiple informants at each plant reported their perceptions on the degree of knowledge and experience of future professionals in the area of supply chain management. The questionnaire was structured in 3 sections (general information, customer expectations, and benchmarking questions). It is important to emphasize that potential customers are companies that hire professionals in the area under study. There is considerable debate in the literature regarding customers in higher education, the perspective of this research can be different from studies that consider students as customers (Lynne and Brennan, 2007; Clayson and Haley, 2005; Bennett, 2003; Adkins and Radtke, 2004). From the results, demographic analyses can be done in order to

QAE 16,1

42

understand better the population under study and future trends and needs in the area of supply chain management. The data collection resulted in 1596 customer expectations that were categorized and summarized in order to include the most inuential and critical in the QFD matrix. Statistical analyses, such as dynamic analysis and factor analysis, were performed in order to classify, reduce and rank these customer expectations. The outcome of this process was the grouping of customer expectations into common customer requirement categories. Using the Customer Window Quadrant (CWQ), customer expectations were summarized and categorized in order of importance, with the nal selection done using the results obtained in the CWQ. Phase 2: QFD and benchmarking analysis When all the customer expectations were dened and categorized, the nal number of customer expectations analyzed in this study was 25, after the reduction process. QFD and benchmarking analyses were applied. As can be seen in Figure 2, the research group designed a method using the basic procedure of the QFD. The conventional four-matrices of the QFD method designed for manufacturing companies (Hauser and Clausing, 1988) was modied slightly so that it could be applied to the academic program design. Specically, the four-matrix method was

Figure 2. Strategic QFD

transformed into a three-matrix action-based method (Gonzalez et al., 2005). These three matrices included (1) house of quality (planning matrix); (2) critical parts matrix; and (3) action plans matrix. Conventional terms also had to be modied to apply the methodology to the design. Matrix I: developing the planning matrix. This step is known as the House of Quality. Activities in this step include the following: . identifying the customers; . identifying customer expectations and their importance; . analyzing customer expectations (What); . identifying current methods and processes (How or academic requirements); . ranking academic requirements; and . establishing correlations between customer and academic requirements to nally develop and analyze the House of Quality (HOQ) (Gonzalez et al., 2004). The other two matrixes are part of the problem solution and are explained in the next section. Phase 3: design of an academic program in supply chain management This phase is divided in the two nal steps of the QFD methodology: the development and analysis of the nal academic program in supply chain management. Matrix II: developing of critical parts matrix. This step corresponds to planning the design of a supply chain management academic curriculum using the links between the academic requirements identied in Step I to operational elements (this information came from the survey applied to faculty members of 18 supply chain academic programs in USA). Matrix III: action plans matrix. In this step, an action plan is developed based on the information obtained in the previous two steps. The nal action plan consists of the supply chain management academic curriculum. In this phase, multiple factors are considered based on the information collected in the previous phases. These factors include the academic programs organizational structure, technology requirements, and marketing strategy for motivating the customers to support the academic program.

SCM academic curriculum

43

Results Designing an academic program in supply chain management; a study case To illustrate the methodology, results from the study of the proposed supply chain management undergraduate program at the College of Charleston (CofC) were used. The program is still under design, so all the ndings obtained from this study will be used to shape the nal undergraduate business major in supply chain management at the College of Charleston.

QAE 16,1

The application of QFD and benchmarking enabled the researchers to translate research ndings into actionable strategies. In the next section the authors explain each of those strategies in detail. Developing a planning matrix Identifying the customers. In a broad sense, the student is the product of any academic process that will serve the needs of the companies that will hire them. Therefore, there is no doubt that the customer of any academic institution is the companies that will hire their graduates, not the students; the latter are the products or outcomes of the academic processes at the institutions. With this in mind, the researchers will continue using the word customer for the companies and products for the students in academic institutions. Identifying customers requirements and importance. The rst step in applying QFD methodology is to generate the customers expectations. In order to generate this important information the research group consulted secondary data. Using the job descriptions and requirements for open positions in supply chain management and logistics, a set of 1,595 expectations were generated. More than 350 position requests were analyzed in this process. The rst reduction tool applied in this study was Dynamic Analysis Reduction Process (DARP) (Gonzalez et al., 2003; Forrester, 1961) DARP is a tool used for reducing the number of variables; this technique considers the interrelationship among variables, and groups similar variables using the direct and indirect inuence in the main variable. For this study, the main variable is customer supply chain management program. DARP determined that 1,202 indirect variables are related with only 29 variables or expectations that are related directly with the main variable. Using DARP allows a better understanding of the complexity in the relationships among variables; the application of DARP reduces the number of items by only 24 percent. The results of this analysis can be seen in Table II. The original customers requirements (1,595) were grouped into 393 customer expectations (direct variables) using the DARP. After all the correlations were done, the research group separated the total number of customer expectations (1,595) into two groups. Group 1 contains the indirect variables (customer expectations) that are related indirectly with the main purpose of the project. Group 2 are the direct variables (393) and are those variables that affect directly the composition of the new academic program under study. Using the basic concepts of dynamic analysis, we selected the direct variables for next steps. According to dynamic analysis theory (Gonzalez et al., 2003; Forrester, 1961) if we satisfy the direct problems, all the other indirect variables will be satised. Dynamic analysis examines the relationship among variables and reduces the number of variables that are related, obtaining only those that have a critical inuence on the main problem. However, further data reduction will be needed for building the nal house of quality. In order to further reduce the number of items, factor analysis (Varimax rotation) was used. Factor analysis was conducted to study in more detail expectations inter-relationships and to determine empirically their underlying structure. To conduct the factor analysis, given only 395 subjects (customer expectations), the researchers separated the quantitative from the qualitative expectations and analyzed each separately. Furthermore, 25 items with the lowest item-to-total correlations were deleted.

44

Customer expectation

Dynamic analysis results Direct Indirect 21 48 12 11 27 11 14 10 10 15 26 20 22 9 13 17 16 6 12 7 11 11 6 10 6 3 9 4 6 393 142 56 69 69 45 59 55 58 57 49 35 33 31 43 38 31 32 35 29 29 23 22 26 22 26 27 19 24 18 1,202

Total 163 104 81 80 72 70 69 68 67 64 61 53 53 52 51 48 48 41 41 36 34 33 32 32 32 30 28 28 24 1,595

Code POMK TA MSK BSSK MK SCHMK LSK ISSK ASK LK QE FK CE FSK SRK TWSK KAS PK TO CSK CRSK ISKK DSSK GK VRK RSK NESK PK CSK

SCM academic curriculum

Production and operations knowledge Technical aptitude Management skill Business strategy skills Market knowledge Supply chain management knowledge Leadership skills Information systems skills Analysis skills Logistics knowledge Quality engineering Financial knowledge Certication Forecasting skills Supplier relations knowledge Team work skills Knowledge of Asian supply Purchasing knowledge Multi-bilingual Customer satisfaction knowledge Customer relationship skills Inventory skills and knowledge Decision making skills Global knowledge Vendor relationship Retailing skills Negotiating skills Procurement knowledge Communication skills Total

45

Note: Indirect customer expectations are the original ones (coming from the initial screen of expectations)

Table II. DARP results

Using this set of 370 items, and the criterion to retain factors with values greater than 1.0, six customer expectations factors were identied that explained 52 percent of the variance. Keeping in mind that one of the goals at this stage was to reduce the number of items further, we systematically deleted items that loaded ambiguously (factor loadings greater than 0.45 on more than one factor). Several iterations of analyses were conducted until a stable and interpretable set of results was obtained. The output from the factor analysis shows 49 customer expectations remaining for further analyses. The process continues to cycle until the people involved in the project are satised with the results. Through these processes, individual customer expectations are grouped into common customer requirement categories. Before this can happen, however, further data reduction is normally needed. A new survey was released to ISM members in order to evaluate and prioritize for the nal 49 expectations obtained from the previous analysis. After the evaluation of the new

QAE 16,1

46

results, the research group analyzed the results and used the Customer Window Quadrant technique designed by Intel, 2002 to categorize the nal 48 expectations. The CWQ is an analytical quality tool designed to cluster and classify customer expectations based both on the level of importance and the level of satisfaction of each expectation from the customers perspective Gonzalez et al., 2005. There are four quadrants whose characteristics and guidelines as can be seen in Figure 3 and are described as follows: (1) Quadrant A. The customer wants it but does not get it. Rated as High Importance/Low Satisfaction, this is the critical quadrant. All customer expectations placed here require immediate action. Universities must set up an action plan to move the critical ones to quadrant B as soon as possible. (2) Quadrant B. The customer wants it and gets it. Rated as High Importance/High Satisfaction, this is the most desired quadrant. All important and critical customer expectations should be here and stay here. Universities must improve and monitor all quality characteristics placed here. (3) Quadrant C. The customer does not want it and does not get it. Rated as Low Importance/Low Satisfaction, items in this quadrant are of the lowest importance and should not be the focus for now. Institutions should not take any action unless there are changes in the market, service strategy or customer expectations. (4) Quadrant D. The customer does not want it but gets it anyway. Rated as Low Importance/High Satisfaction items found here are not needed and possibly costly. Action should be taken to remove these items if the customer requirement being offered is expensive or represents any other type of risk to the university. If the quality characteristic placed here is eliminated or reduced, perhaps the customer will not notice it.

Figure 3. Customer windows quadrant

The results of the application of the CWQ showed the following clustering based on customer weighting as described in the process-planning matrix mentioned above, namely: . Quadrant A: ve customer expectations were placed here. An action plan should be set up to describe how to move these customer expectations to quadrant B. According to the results, companies need people with knowledge of other cultures, especially Asian. In addition, the knowledge and practice of additional languages is also important. Clearly, a key nding of this research is that multicultural knowledge is essential for professionals in the area of supply chain management. . Quadrant B: 21 customer expectations were placed here. A special plan should be formulated to maintain, improve and monitor these customer expectations. In addition, three customer expectations were classied under quadrants C and 20 under quadrant D; however, only those considered as critical were shown on quadrants A and B. On the other hand, the expectations in quadrant D could be move to quadrant B in order to expand and satisfy the maximum amount of expectations. The nal number of customer expectations analyzed in this study was 29 (after all the process reduction). Analyzing the customer expectations (Whats). In this section of the curriculum planning stage, in order to setup the Voice of Customer matrix, information coming from different sources were used: . potential employers prioritized customer expectations in a survey; . research team rigorously evaluated the supply chain programs of the selected comparable competitors and assigned evaluations of each customer expectation, a degree of fullment; and nally . research team set target goals for the School of Business and Economics at the College of Charleston (CofC) in all customer expectations. Table III shows summary results of a survey applied to 65 practitioners and potential employers in the area under study. It is important to mention that the researchers sent the questionnaire using e-mail addresses to 75 potential customers (employers) and received in return, 65 usable questionnaires (90 percent response). From this Table, 14 customers expectations are ranked as critical for future professionals in the area. An interesting nding was that the expectation about knowledge of both Asian and global markets were ranked as the most important skills that future professionals need to develop, factors that need to be considered seriously in the nal academic program. From this survey, it was possible to establish that expectations for potential employers can be categorized in ve dened areas: Management, Decisions Sciences, Supply Chain Management, Information Systems and Marketing. In Table IV, there is a column that evaluates the level of importance of each customer expectation (obtained directly from customer surveys). Additionally, there is a column that evaluates the overall importance. Overall importance not only considers the customers level of importance, but also the necessary degree of improvement for the CofC to full the expectations (improvement ratio) and the qualication of the requirement as sales point (is this requirement prominent in the academic program to

SCM academic curriculum

47

QAE 16,1

Customer expectations Communication skills Knowledge of Asian supply Decision making skills Team work skills Logistics knowledge Market knowledge Multi-bilingual Customer relationship skills Analysis skills Certication Business strategy skills Technical aptitude Supply chain management knowledge Purchasing knowledge Customer satisfaction knowledge Leadership skills Supplier relations knowledge Negotiation skills Global knowledge Inventory skills and knowledge Information systems skills Production and open knowledge Management skills Financial knowledge Forecasting skills Procurement knowledge Retailing skills Quality engineering

Code CSK KAS DSSK TSWK LK MK TO CRSK ASK CE BSSK TA SCHMK PK CSK LSK SRK NESK GK ISKK ISSK POMK MSK FK FSK PK RSK QE

Average 4.46 4.42 4.39 4.30 4.29 4.28 4.26 4.23 4.20 4.18 4.13 4.12 4.11 4.09 3.96 3.91 3.89 3.86 3.84 2.82 2.80 3.73 3.66 3.63 3.63 3.54 2.57 2.52

48

Table III. Customer priority results

be considered competent by employers?). At the same time, these importance levels will impact the decision on which courses are highly required to successful fullment of the most important customer requirements, considering not only the customer but also the benchmarking results that determine improvement ratios. Using the importance of the potential employers and all the other evaluations the nal results show that the expectations knowledge of Asian Supply (4.5), communication skills (4.3), certication knowledge (4.2), decision-making skills (4.1) and teamwork skills (4.1) are the most critical expectations and must be addressed in any academic program related to supply chain management. As can be seen from Table IV, potential employers consider important the expectations of logistics knowledge and customer relationships skills (4.2). Both results are very similar, thus conrming that the research team has listened to the customers needs or expectations in the right way. Identifying current methods and processes or critical elements (Hows). Current methods and processes or critical elements (hows) for the CofC case, refer to specic courses that contain topics that include the customer expectations. Unfortunately, customer expectations are not often stated in terms of the universities current courses. Therefore, the researchers translated customer expectations (called Whats in the

Importance to customer 4.2 4.1 4.5 4 4.2 4.4 3.6 3.6 3.8 3.8 3.9 4.3 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.7 4.2 3.5 2.8 3.8 3.9 3.8 3.3 3 2.9 3.8 3.4 3.8 3 3 3 4.1 3.8 4.1 4 3 3.2 3.5 3.2 2.5 2.6 2.6 3 3.2 3.5 3.8 3.5 3 3 3 2.5 4.2 4 4.5 4 4 4 4.2 3.9 4.1 4 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.1 3.3 3.3 3.2 2.9 3.6 3.8 3.8 3.4 2.8 3 2.5 3 4.5 4.4 4.1 4 4 3.6 3.4 3.8 3 4.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 4 3.7 3.1 3.8 3 4 1.2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4.1 3.2 3 2.8 2.9 2.5 3.6 3 3 2.8 4.3 4.5 1.3 1.3 1 1 4.2 3.5 3.1 3.8 3.2 4.5 1.3 1 5.3 5.2 6 4.8 5.2 5.9 4.6 4.8 4.6 4.7 4.7 5.6 4.8 4.7 4.7

University of Tennessee

Southern University

North Texas University

Maryland University

College of Improvement Sales Overall Charleston Goal ratio points importance

Analysis skills Business strategy skills Communication skills Customer satisfaction knowledge Customer relationship skills Decision making skills Financial knowledge Forecasting skills Global knowledge Inventory skills and knowledge Leadership skills Logistics knowledge Management skills Information systems skills Negotiation skills Production and operations knowledge

4.6 (continued)

SCM academic curriculum

49

Table IV. Comparing results

50

QAE 16,1

Procurement knowledge Retailing skills Supply chain management knowledge Supplier relations knowledge Team work skills Purchasing knowledge Certication knowledge Knowledge of Asian supply Market knowledge Multi-lingual Quality control knowledge Technical aptitude 3.5 2.6 4.1 3.9 4.3 4.1 4.2 4.5 4.3 4.3 2.6 4.1 3.1 3.6 1.9 2.9 1.5 1.9 1 2.8 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4.1 3.6 2.8 3.9 1 1 1.2 1.1 2.9 3.2 4.1 3.8 3.5 3.4 3.1 2.9 3.8 3.6 4.2 3.6 3 3.8 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3 3.6 3.8 2.8 4.2 4.1 3.4 3.6 2.9 3 3.9 3.9 3 3 4.2 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.2 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.3 4.1

Table IV. Importance to customer University of Tennessee Southern University North Texas University Maryland University College of Improvement Sales Overall Charleston Goal ratio points importance 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4.3 3.2 5 4.8 5.3 5 5.1 5.8 5.6 5.1 2.9 5.2

QFD language) into critical elements (called Hows in the QFD language). The critical elements are placed at the top of the HOQ and, in this application, represent the activities of the ideal academic program. In order to determine the relationship between whats and hows, researchers asked the question, If this is what the customer requires, how can we cover and measure it in the academic program? In the critical matrix, these critical elements are divided into the ve areas mentioned earlier: Accounting, Marketing, Management, Quantitative Analysis, Supply Chain Management and Information Systems. Ranking the critical elements. The roof of the HOQ indicates the synergistic nature of the new proposed courses. They are used to identify courses that are highly correlated, but also, courses that may detrimental to other courses. In the design of the supply chain management academic program, there were no such courses limiting the success of other courses Establishing correlations between customer and critical elements. An analysis of customer expectations in each university selected for the benchmark analysis was developed in order to assess the relationship among customer expectations (potential employers requirements) and critical elements (Academic Program requirements). Table IV shows evidence of a strong relationship among Communications skills (6.0), Decision-making skills (5.9) and Knowledge of Asian Supply (5.8). Notice that the value in parentheses represents the overall importance that denes the strength of the relationship between all the variables and relations in the matrix. This means that if the customers (potential employers) are looking for special skills in Asian market knowledge, communication abilities and decision making thinking when they hire professionals in the area of supply chain management, then satisfying the critical elements mentioned above will satisfy part of the customer skills requirement. Developing and analyzing the house of quality. The HOQ matrix (the planning matrix) fully depicts all the customer expectations (Whats) and critical elements (Hows) and provides information useful in determining which courses or areas are important in meeting the demands of the customers. It creates a set of priorities for the customer expectations based on their importance to the customer and their importance to the development teams organization. This set of priorities will have a major impact on all future planning and development activities. As can be shown in Figure 4, universities need to enhance all academic requirements because, in all cases, the customer evaluations are under the average and behind of the Goal (performance gap). The HOQ provides important information about what areas need to be improved. Using the improvement factor it is easy to understand that currently the CofC has a slight advantage if we compare it to other universities in the area of bilingual skills of students. The CofC is a Public Art and Sciences University with a strong liberal arts tradition. One of the strengths of the College is the availability of courses in different languages. In fact, students must complete two years of a foreign language as part of their academic curriculum. For this reason, this area or customer requirement requires less improvement than the remaining customer expectations. The matrix also shows that CofCs proposed program does not yet has any sales points (sales point is the ability to sell product or service, based on how well each customer need or expectation is met). Moreover, the HOQ shows that improvements are needed in all the customer expectations. These customer expectations received the lowest evaluations in the competitive analysis and should be addressed in order to satisfy customer

SCM academic curriculum

51

QAE 16,1

52

Figure 4. Planning matrix

expectations. The latter is an expected result because COFC does not yet have the ofcial program in supply chain management. The HOQ also provides information about the evaluation of the critical elements. The following Hows were found to be the most important and need to be considered on the nal action plans: courses in the areas of Supply Chain Management (Advanced Logistics strategy (294.4), Introduction to Logistics Management (269.8), Introduction to Supply Chain management (269.8), Issues in Operations and Supply Chain Management (269.8)). Analysis of the house of quality from the benchmarking perspective. This section provides a summary of the benchmarking results by area. The benchmarking was done with comparable universities for the COFC, including: University of Tennessee, Southern University, University of North Texas and Maryland University (ranked in Rutner and Fawcett, 2005). The best academic program in SCM from the four universities is the University of Tennessee. The research team divided the skills into four areas in order to evaluate each area in each university. According to this distribution, University of Tennessee obtained a global average in analytical skills of 3.96, in management skills of 3.725, in supply chain management of 4.1 and in other specic areas of 2.08. All benchmarked universities had low values in other specic areas. This is because they involve some of the unique customer expectations that have not been fullled yet in the market of supply chain management programs. These unique customer expectations include knowledge of Asian supply, global knowledge and certication. Therefore, these are areas for creating competitive advantage According to Table V, the performance of University of North Texas Program is lagging the other programs and needs an improvement in all of the activities and all areas in order to compete with the other universities close to its campus in Denton, TX. It is important to mention that the others specic skills area in all the cases is the area with lower evaluation by the practitioners and potential employers. As mentioned before, the requirements are new due to new market trends generally, and new opportunities specically within Asia. In summary, the academic program with the overall highest performance is University of Tennessee (3.61), followed by Maryland University Academic Program (3.25), Southern University (2.99), and University of North Texas (2.60). This information can be graphically observed for all academic programs in Figure 5. Developing action plans The present study indicates that ve major action plans should be implemented in order to satisfy customer expectations: (1) focus on a program that involves more analytical skills; (2) increase the number of courses related to global issues (Asian Markets, Asian supply, international certication, etc.); (3) promote bilingual classes and study abroad programs to students in the Supply Chain Management major; (4) have a balance among the ve areas selected by the customers (accounting, management, quantitative, supply chain management and management information systems); and, (5) create continuous improvement teams that evaluate customer expectations and the competitions performance (benchmarking) periodically.

SCM academic curriculum

53

54

QAE 16,1

Analytical skills

Management skills

Supply chain management skills 4.3 4.1 3.5 2.6 3.9 3.8 4.2 3.7 4.1 4 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.2 4.1 3.9

Other specic skills

Table V. Benchmarking analysis

Benchmarking analysis Analysis skills Deecision making skills Financial knowledge Forecasting skills Technical aptitude Average Management skills Business strategy skills Leadership skills Information systems skills Team work skills Communication skills Customer satisfaction knowledge Quality control knowledge Average 4 2.6 3.863 4 3.1 3.725 3.7 1.9 3.125 3.5 3.6 3.4 3.6 3.3 3 3.6 3.5 4.2 4.1 4.1 2 1 1 3.6 2.8 2.08 3.6 3.5 3.46 1 1 1 3.1 1 1.42 3.1 1.5 2.688 2.6 2.8 2.9 3 2.9 2.5 3.4 2.8 3 3.1 2.9 1 1 1 2.9 1 1.38 4.2 4.4 3.6 3.6 4.1 3.98 3.7 4.1 3.9 3.8 4.3 4.5 4.2 3.9 4.1 4 3.6 3.96 4 4.1 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.2 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 2.9 3.4 3.2 3 3.2 3.8 3.4 2.8 3.1 3.3 3.3 3.2 1.9 2.96 3 2.9 2.6 3 2.9 2.5 Average customer importance University of Tennessee Southern University North Texas University Maryland University 3.8 3.6 3.8 3.8 3.2 3.64 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.8 3.6 3 3.8 2.9 3.463 3.8 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.4 3.2 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.73 1.1 1 1 3.4 1.2 1.54 Logistics knowledge Purchasing knowledge Procurement knowledge Retailing skills Negotiation skills Inventory skills and knowledge Customer relationship skills Production and operations knowledge Supply chain management knowledge Supplier relations knowledge Average Bilingual skills Knowledge of Asian supply Certication knowledge Global knowledge Market knowledge Average 4.1 3.9 3.81 4.3 4.5 4.2 3.8 4.3 4.22

SCM academic curriculum

55

Figure 5. Performance by skills requirement and by university

In order to achieve the previous action plans, a new academic program is depicted in Figure 6. As shown, the major in supply chain management requires 54 hrs, and all the expectations are satised with the new program. Conclusions and recommendations This research has several important contributions. First, it suggests a useful solution to the design of academic programs, where all the expectations of potential employers can be satised. Second, it presents a methodology for analyzing customer expectations. Finally, it opens the window for future research in the area to include the uses of innovative tools to solve real problems. The application of QFD and benchmarking as a joint analysis tool is a very interesting approach because the information is analyzed from different perspectives simultaneously. In addition, the resulting outcome from the QFD/benchmarking analysis is an academic programme which embraces customer expectations and the requirements that potential employers are looking for. Determining detailed skills for future professionals in the area of supply chain management reduces the potential training costs for companies and reduces the gap between academia and business. With the outcomes produced by this methodology, academic institutions decision makers can now have specic suggestions on which to base decisions regarding the most appropriate courses and potential student proles. Areas designated as highly important for performance standards improvements can easily be pinpointed and addressed. In todays competitive world, customer satisfaction is a vital goal to be accomplished at an affordable cost. One important factor in customer satisfaction is the effective identication of customer expectations. This paper illustrates the use of an approach that takes advantage of benchmarking/QFD analysis in order to design an

QAE 16,1

56

Figure 6. Supply chain management academic program

academic programme that satises the real needs of the market in the area of supply chain management. While this study demonstrates the effectiveness of the applications of these techniques to applied academic areas, the use of this approach can clearly be extended to other areas for the design of specic courses. The most important of these is to clarify who the customers are and what their expectations are. Future research can benet from this research by: expanding the scope from academic programmes to industrial applications in order to comparatively analyze the applicability of the proposed tools; and applying the same methodology to other areas of academia such as research, for developing a model for the identication of customers, (student) needs and potential solutions. Glossary of terms QFD VOC CWQ SCM TQM HOQ CofC DARP ISM Quality Function Deployment Voice of the Customer Customer Windows Quadrant Supply Chain Management Total Quality Management House of Quality College of Charleston Dynamic Analysis Reduction Process Institute of Supply Chain Management

SCM academic curriculum

57

References Adkins, N. and Radtke, R.R. (2004), Students and faculty members perceptions of the importance of business ethics and accounting ethics education: is there an expectation gap?, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 279-300. Akao, Y. (1972), New product development and quality assurance quality deployment system, Standardization and Quality Control, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 7-14. Akao, Y. and Mazur, G. (2003), The leading edge in QFD: past, present and future, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 20-35. Akao, Y., Nagai, K. and Maki, N. (1996), QFD concept for improving higher education, Proceedings of the 50th ASQC Quality Congress, Chicago, IL, pp. 12-20, Chicago, IL. Andersen, B. and Camp, R. (1995), Current position and future development of benchmarking, TQM Magazine, Vol. 7 No. 5, pp. 21-5. Ayse, A. and Veli, D. (2005), Quality function deployment in education: a curriculum review, Quality and Quantity, Vol. 39 No. 4. Bennett, R. (2003), Determinants of undergraduate student drop out rates in a university business studies department, Journal of Further and Higher Education, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 123-39.

QAE 16,1

58

Cadogan, J.W., Diamantopoulos, A. and Mortanges, C.P. (1999), A measure of export market orientation: scale development and cross-cultural validation, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 689-96. Chang, I.-F. and Ku, A.C.-H. (1995), Engineering and Technical Education in Taiwan: An observation based on TQM Concept, ASEE, Atlanta, GA. Chen, C. and Bullington, S.F. (1993), Development of a strategic research plan for an academic department through the use of quality function deployment, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Vol. 25 Nos 1-4, pp. 49-52. Choon, T.K., Lyman, S.B. and Wisner, J.D. (2002), Supply chain management: a strategic perspective, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 614-31. Clayson, D.E. and Haley, D.A. (2005), Marketing models in education: students as customers, products, or partners, Marketing Education Review, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 1-10. Clayton, M. (1993), Treading the quality path: a progress report from Aston University, in Paper, D.W. (Ed.), Quality Management in Universities, Australia Government Publishing Service, Canberra. Duffuaa, S., Al-Turki, U. and Hawsawi, F. (2003), Quality function deployment for designing a basic statistics course, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 20 No. 6. Ellram, L.M. and Carr, A. (1994), Strategic purchasing: a history and review of the literature, International Journal of Purchasing & Materials Management, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 10-18. Ermer, D.S. (1995), Using QFD becomes an educational experience for students and faculty, Quality Progress, May, pp. 131-6. Forrester, J. (1961), Industrial Dynamic, Productivity Press Inc., Portland, OR. Franceschini, F. and Rossetto, S. (1995), QFD: the problem of comparing technical/engineering design requirements, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 270-8. Gonzalez, M. (2001), Quality Function Deployment; A Road for Listening to Customer Expectations, McGraw Hill, Mexico City. Gonzalez, M., Quesada, G. and Bahill, T. (2003), Improving product design using quality function deployment: the school furniture case in developing countries, Quality Engineering Journal, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 47-58. Gonzalez, M., Quesada, G., Mack, R. and Urrutia de Hoyos, I. (2005), Building an activity-based costing hospital model using quality function deployment and benchmarking, Benchmarking: an International Journal, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 310-29. Gonzalez, M., Quesada, G., Mueller, R.D. and Mora-Monge, C. (2004), QFD strategy house: an innovative tool for linking marketing and manufacturing strategy, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 335-48. Grifn, A., Gleason, G., Preiss, R. and Shevenaugh, D. (1995), Best practice for customer satisfaction in manufacturing rms, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 87-98. Harland, C.M. (1996), Supply chain management: relationships, chains and networks, British Journal of Management, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 63-80. Hauser, J.R. and Clausing, D.M.-J. (1988), The House of Quality, Harvard Business Review, May-June, pp. 63-73. Hokey, M., Amitava, M. and Sharon, O. (1997), Competitive benchmarking of health care quality using the AHP: an example from Korean cancer clinic, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 147-59.

Hwarng, B. and Teo, C. (2001), Translating customers voices into operations requirements: a QFD application in higher education, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 195-225. Intel (Ed.) (2002), Customer Window Quadrant, Intel, Tucson, AZ. Jae, K.K., Chang, H.H., Sang, H.C. and Soung, H.K. (1998), A knowledge-based approach to the quality function deployment, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Vol. 35 Nos 1-2, pp. 223-36. Jaraiedi, M. and Ritz, D. (1994), Total quality management applied to engineering education, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 32-40. Jeong, M. and Oh, H. (1998), Quality function deployment: an extended framework for service quality and customer satisfaction in the hospitality industry, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 375-90. Koksal, G. and Alpay, E. (1998), Planning and design of industrial engineering education quality, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Vol. 35 Nos 3-4, pp. 639-42. Krishnan, M. and Houshmand, A.A. (1993), QFD in academia: addressing customer requirements in the design of engineering curricula, Fifth Symposium on Quality Function Deployment, November, MI. Lam, K. and Zhao, X. (1998), An application of quality function deployment to improve the quality of teaching, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 389-413. Leenders, M.R., Nollet, J. and Ellram, L. (1994), Adapting purchasing to supply chain management, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 40-2. Lynne, E. and Brennan, R. (2007), Are students customers? TQM and marketing perspectives, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 44-60. Motwani, J., Kumar, A. and Mohamed, Z. (1996), Implementing QFD for improving quality in education: an example, Journal of Professional Services Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 149-59. Murgatroyd, S. (1993), The house of quality: using QFD for instructional design in distance education, The American Journal of Distance Educaction, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 34-48. Owlia, M.S. and Aspinwall, E.M. (1998), Application of quality function deployment for the improvement of quality in an engineering department, European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 105-15. Peters, T. (1988), Facing up to the need for a management revolution, California Management Review, Vol. 30, pp. 8-38. Pitman, G., Motwani, J., Kumar, A. and Cheng, C.H. (1995), QFD application in an educational setting: a pilot eld study, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 63-72. Porter, M. (1994), International business benchmarking, Management Services, Vol. 38 No. 10, pp. 6-8. Pun, K.F., Chin, K. and Lau, H. (2000), A QFD/Hoshin approach for service quality deployment: a case study, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 156-70. Quesada, G. (1999), A comparative study of quality practices and results in Taiwan, Mexico and Costa Rica, unpublished thesis, The University of Toledo, Toledo, OH. Rogers, R.E. (1993), Managing for quality: current differences between Japanese and American approaches, National Productivity Review, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 503-17.

SCM academic curriculum

59

QAE 16,1

60

Rosenkrantz, P.R. (1996), Using TQM techniques for curriculum development: developing the manufacturing engineering curriculum at Cal. Poly, Pomona, Annual Quality Congress Transactions, ASQC Quality Press, Milwaukee, WI, pp. 29-37. Rutner, S. and Fawcett, D. (2005), The state of supply chain education, Supply Chain Management Review, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 55-60. Schmidt, J.A. (1992), The link between benchmarking and shareholder value, Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 7-12. Seow, C. and Moody, T. (1996), QFD as a tool for better curriculum design, Milwaukee, WI. Stuart, F.I. and Tax, S.S. (1996), Planning for service quality: an integrative approach, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 58-77. Trappey, C.V., Trappey, A.J. and Hwang, S.-J. (1996), A compututerized quality function deployment approach for retail services, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 611-22. Whymark, J. (1998), Benchmarking and credit risk management in nancial services, Benchmarking Quality Management Technology, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 126-37. Woodburn, D.T. (1999), Benchmarking marketing processes for performance improvement: a new approach from the Chartered Institute of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 15 No. 8, pp. 779-98. Further reading Benjamin, C.O. and Pattanapanchai, S. (1993), A QFD framework for developing engineering laboratories, International Journal of Applied Engineering Education, Vol. 9 No. 5, pp. 422-9. Tan, K.C., Lyman, S.B. and Wisner, J.D. (2002), Supply chain management: a strategic perspective, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 614-31. Corresponding author Marvin E. Gonzalez can be contacted at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints