摘 要
本文通过对中国现行质量奖评审标准及其实施效果的深入研究，提出了评审标准的改进方向。总结了中国现行质量奖评审标准的实施效果，通过对世界各国质量奖的比较分析，提出中国质量奖双重评审标准对应设置双重奖项的构想，即参照日本戴明奖来设置基础质量奖由地方颁发，参照美国波多里奇质量奖来设置卓越质量奖由国家颁发。随着信息化技术的蓬勃发展，传统的质量奖申报模式的弊端日益凸显，本文在对现行质量奖进行改进的基础之上，又提出了建立质量奖评奖系统的初步构想。
2001年，中国质量协会开展了全国质量管理奖(2006年更名为全国质量奖) 的评审工作，这是全国质量领域最高奖项，该奖项的评审标准采用了卓越绩效模式这一全球最有影响力的标准，2004年《卓越绩效评价准则》（GB/T19580-2004）正式发布，这一评审标准在各级质量奖中一贯适用。中国各级质量奖采用单一评审标准具有很大的局限性。事实证明，中国需要一个能够真正兼顾到不同规模企业经营质量的新的质量奖评审标准模式——双重标准。让品牌熟知度高、市场声望高、管理水平高、经营绩效好的优秀企业来深入推进卓越绩效评价准则的实施，争创“卓越质量奖”，这一奖项的评审标准参照美国波多里奇质量奖设置。由那些积极追求质量进步，走质量改进之路的企业，通过降低质量缺陷来夯实质量基�。�“基础质量奖”，这一奖项的评审标准参照日本戴明奖设置。双重评选标准的提出属本文首创。
本文对中国现行质量奖的历史演变及评价标准的具体内容作了详细的介绍，提出了中国各级质量奖评审标准评审范围以及社会影响力方面的局限性，并根据卓越绩效模式的实质对其局限性的成因进行了深入的分析。根据日本双奖模式的启示，以及中国企业QC小组活动与卓越绩效并行开展的效果对比，提出了中国采取双奖模式的可行性。
在本文的研究过程中采用问卷调查法进行实证分析，用以证明双重质量奖的可行性，问卷设计主要采用李克量五级打分法，问卷的可信度分析采用克朗巴哈系数法。同时，采用随机抽样法对我国地方质量奖的获奖情况进行统计。
关键词：质量；质量奖；卓越绩效评价准
Abstract
Based on the assessment of China's current Quality Award criteria and the effect of the implementation of the proposed evaluation criteria proposed to improve the direction, summed up the current implementation of standards of quality award evaluation results, the quality of awards around the world through the comparative analysis, proposed that the quality award assessment criteria correspond to the double set of double-winning idea, that the basis of reference to set the Deming Prize of Japan Quality Award presented by the local reference to set the Malcolm Baldrige Quality Award Quality Excellence Award presented by the state. The paper proposed initial ideas of building quality network declaration system on the basis of the improvement of the existing quality award.
China Quality Association in 2001 was carried out in the field of quality and the highest award-the National Quality Management Award (renamed in 2006 the National Quality Award) and post-assessment. And adopted the most influential international performance excellence model as the award assessment criteria, and in 2004 released the National Quality Award assessment criteria - PEM (performance excellence management)(GB/T19580-2004). This accreditation award quality standards at all levels have consistently apply Quality Award at all levels in a single assessment criteria has great limitations. Proved, China needs one and can really give consideration to the new quality bonus that different scale enterprises manage quality and evaluate the standard mode. Japan's Deming Prize and the existing business model is the coexistence of Quality Award to our problems has brought new inspiration, Make the brand well-known high, make the reputation high, make the management level high, good performance, outstanding enterprises to further promote the implementation of the outstanding PEM, and strive for it. The award selection criteria set with reference to the U.S. Baldrige Quality Award. By those who actively pursue quality improvement, and take the road of corporate quality improvement, by reducing the quality of quality defect to reinforce the foundation, to strive for low-level quality award. The award selection criteria set with reference to the Japanese Deming Prize. The double proposition books document which evaluates the standard is initiated.
China's current Quality Award paper the historical evolution and the specific content of evaluation criteria were described in detail, put forward China Quality Award assessment criteria at all levels of scope and social impact assessment of the limitations and high performance model based on the substance of their limitations depth of analysis of causes. With the vigorous development of information technology, the traditional declaration mode of quality award highlights its drawbacks increasingly. According to Japan double prize mode of revelation, and business excellence in QC group activity and comparison of performance of the parallel, feasibility of the proposed China double prize mode.
In this study questionnaire was used during the empirical analysis to prove the feasibility of dual-Quality Award, the questionnaire designed by Rick amount of five major scoring methods, the reliability of the questionnaire was analyzed by Crown Bach coefficient. At the same time, the random sampling of our award winning local situation of the quality of statistics.
Key words：Quality；Quality award；Criteria for Performance excellence
