Hands with a compass and a ruler over a model made of paper and small house blocks

QMC model

Based on: Dissertation, sections 2.4.2, 2.7, 3.1–3.2, 3.4, 4.3.2, 4.4; Figs 7, 10, 11, 28

QMC stands for quality management model for the communication industry. The model describes how characteristics of an agency lead, via the quality of its work, to success at the contractor, and how this success flows back into the agency as learning. It arose from a literature review, was refined in a pre-test with executives from agencies and was then tested against the judgments of 209 contractors.

Figure: The QMC model. Graphic: Dr. Florian Bresler, after the dissertation, section 3.2 (Fig. 10).

Three levels and a loop

On the left are four communication enablers. These are resources and concepts of the agency, material as well as immaterial, which determine how well a communication process succeeds. In the middle is communication quality. It cannot be observed directly. The model treats it as a latent variable that arises from the interplay of the enablers and shows itself in success. On the right is communication success, measured at the contractor in three values.

A loop connects both sides. Its upper arc stands for organization and integration of the enablers, the lower for organizational learning. An agency evaluates the success achieved and uses it to improve its enablers, which carry the next success. The model takes over this continuous improvement cycle from the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) model.

The building blocks in detail

From 31 studies on the prerequisites of good communication and 24 studies on the measurement of success, the thesis derived 26 categories, four per enabler and three or four per success parameter. The pre-test discarded six of them. What remained were seven variables with a total of 20 indicators, which went into the questionnaire.

Level	Variable	Indicators in the questionnaire
Enabler	Leadership efficiency	democratic co-determination, charismatic behaviour, leaders’ organizational identification
Enabler	Employee quality	employee satisfaction, entrepreneurial orientation, communicative competence
Enabler	Communicational strategy	informational competence of the agency, customer commitment and trust, bi-directional customer involvement
Enabler	Resource integration	frictionless knowledge management, electronic systems in the supply chain, integration of customers into learning processes
Success	Customer value	attitude, loyalty and trust of the contractor’s customers
Success	Social value	public interest, reputation and image gains
Success	Financial value	stock value or market value, return on equity, Tobin’s q

The contractors rated the enablers of their agency from 1 for poor to 5 for top performance. The statements on success referred to their own company and a completed project, likewise in five levels from no consent to maximum consent.

Origin in the EFQM

The four enablers are modelled on the categories of the EFQM model; the thesis has tailored their names to the communication business. Leadership efficiency corresponds to leadership, employee quality to employees, communicational strategy to policy and strategy, resource integration to resources and partners. Why the study starts from the EFQM and not from ISO 9001 or Total Quality Management (TQM) is shown by the comparison of the three models.

What the model does differently

Leadership receives a special position. According to the literature, leadership acts on all other enablers; an effect in the opposite direction is not documented. The QMC model therefore weights it more heavily than the EFQM. At the same time, it leaves employees scope, since in agencies tasks often arise only in conversation with the customer.
Financial value is measured directly. The EFQM captures it only indirectly via employees, customers and society. The QMC model lists it as a success parameter of its own, always together with customer value and social value, because financial key figures alone do not give a complete picture.
Employees appear only on the input side. In the EFQM they appear twice, as an enabler and as a result. Cause and effect then depend on each other and cannot be measured separately. The QMC model assigns employee quality to the enablers alone.

Presumed cross-relationships

In the draft derived from the literature, leadership influences the three other enablers. Employees, strategy and resources act on one another reciprocally; a highly formalized strategy, for example, can demotivate employees. On the success side, customer value and social value are connected, and both are supposed to raise financial value in the long run. The estimated structural equation model does not depict these cross-relationships because the literature hardly quantifies them. The study itself counts this among its limitations.

What remained of the model

The survey confirmed the model only in part. Four of seven core hypotheses were accepted, two of them being reference paths. In three steps the model shrank to three enablers and two success measures. Resource integration and financial value dropped out. In the final model, leadership efficiency lies far ahead of the other enablers, and on the success side customer trust lies ahead of reputation gains. Weights, paths and the three amendments are found under Results.

Figure: Final model with standardized weights. Graphic after the dissertation, section 4.3.2 (Fig. 28, Table 12).

What the model is for

The thesis assigns two tasks to the model. For agencies, it shows which enablers they can start from, and it gives them arguments towards their contractors. For contractors, it serves as a grid for assessing an agency’s core competences and their influence on the expected success. According to the findings, the most worthwhile thing to look at is the agency’s leadership, and trust and reputation are more likely to be expected than a quick return. More on this under Practice.