Quality management effectiveness in Asia: The influence of culture
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Globalization forces managers to utilize manufacturing capabilities from countries with different cultures than their own, particularly from Asia. Yet quality problems in China have raised concerns among managers and researchers as to how to assure product quality from Asian facilities. Implementing quality management practices may accomplish this, but such practices assume specific cultural values exist in certain Asian cultures. Using global manufacturing and cultural data, this study examines if cultural values in Asian and non‐Asian countries moderate how effective quality management practices are at improving quality performance. Through the use of multilevel modeling, differences in quality management effectiveness are found among the East Asian cultures of China, South Korea, and Taiwan. Moreover, this study finds that specific cultural dimensions are statistically related to quality management effectiveness. The results of this study will assist managers in devising plans to assure higher quality from East Asian facilities and in predicting where problems may occur in other countries around the world.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it