Our title Global Management of Quality Assurance System does not allow us to study and describe the management of quality of products and services in all its aspect and in all major parts of the world. Rather, we concrete on quality assurance systems as they have been developed during recent decades. In a quality assurance system all elements, such as buying, producing, and inspecting are designed to ensure that a specified quality level is consistently and effectively attained. As condition vary between industries, regions, and countries, so must the quality assurance systems. Butt in all setting there are many commonalities for quality assurance, because the ultimate goal and purpose are the same. This allows us to view quality assurance systems in a global perspective.

In each chapter, the activities at the supranational levels, such as in the international standards Organization will be described. In the second-to-last chapter on global competition we return to the less technical and more political question that concern corporate management, government, the professions, and educational institutions.  

Total quality management is the integration of all functions and process within an organization in order to achieve continues improvement of the quality of goods and services. The goal is customer satisfaction. The book is practical yet based on sound principles. It is not about the “hard” science of statistical quality control, although this topic is treated along with other applied tools and techniques that are necessary for implementation of a quality program. It is an excellent text for collage student as well as for organizational development programs directed to practitioners who are responsible for developing and implementing TQM programs in their own organizations, whether in manufacturing or services firms.  

This book, written by corporate governance experts in seven APO member countries, is both a sequel to and explores a range of best practice experiences uncovered by its predecessor, Impact of Corporate Governance on Productivity: Asian Experience, published by the APO in 2004. The collection of papers in this book seeks to answer the question of how to understand and manage best practice approaches in corporate governance, which too often remain unarticulated. The book illustrates how praxis, i.e., translating theory into action, has shaped and reshaped the corporate sector in the Asian countries covered in the essays, making these countries the best they can be in specific corporate governance fields. The APO decided to publish this book to further the cause of corporate governance as a productivity instrument in its member countries. The basic premise is that generating best practice yardsticks by which corporate governance can be gauged helps promote good corporate governance principles and practices.

Corporate governance is not only a method firms use to discipline themselves while remaining profitable. It is also one of the principal ways they “make the society” in which they operate and which in turn “makes” them. If this relationship is obscured, it is because the existing policy and regulatory environment confronts firms with an apparently readymade and opaque organization of means and ends, in which compliance is necessary but over whose purpose the majority of organizations, whether companies or civil society groups, have little or no control. In their individual ways, most of the papers in this publication reflect attempts to regain the power to direct or determine the objectives of business, make the administration of means and ends more transparent, raise the bar of corporate standards, and put restraints on the power of the state to erect needless barriers against the freedom of corporate action.

In Asia, with its complicated business practices, no one country can claim superiority in all facets of corporate governance. But a number of Asian countries have made steady strides in specific aspects, and these are highlighted in this compendium of best practices. The book includes significant advances achieved by the following countries in key corporate governance areas: Malaysia, the general regulatory and institutional environment; India, public enterprise management; Japan, board effectiveness and ownership structure; Singapore, transparency and disclosure; Republic of China, network organizations; Vietnam, equitization; and the Philippines, corporate social responsibility. Considering the context in which the corporate governance efforts of the APO have been formulated? firms are the centerpiece of interventions, but backed up by strong government policies? the essays demonstrate that good governance laws and regulations, on the one hand, and good firm practices, on the other, both result in better performance and higher productivity.

It is impossible to cover more than a fraction of the good corporate governance practices that an increasingly complex Asian corporate sector requires. Readers will note that certain topics are not included: dilution of ownership, ready availability of voice and exit options for shareholders, good creditor and debtor relations, credible insolvency mechanisms, and better productivity and quality management, among others. Similarly, as noted in the introductory essay by the chief expert, it is hard to ignore the make-or-break role of institutions in shaping good governance practices. Each significant absence suggests a gulf between theory and practice, indicating the need to widen the research agenda on corporate governance.

Despite recent advances, biotechnology still has enormous potential to create additional changes in agriculture. In many countries in the Asia and Pacific region, its application is still in the nascent stage and its benefits have not yet reached the majority of the population. In many cases, R&D outputs are still not reaching the commercialization stage, for varied reasons, and hence their full potential benefits to farmers and consumers in general remain untapped. Some consumers’ and environmentalists’ concerns related to food safety and the environmental ramifications of biotechnology are affecting its wider commercial applications and heightening the uncertainty surrounding its use.

The APO therefore organized a multi-country study mission on “Business Potential for Agricultural Biotechnology Products” to review the topic and identify how private companies, especially SMEs and including the government corporate sector, could capitalize on that potential in member countries to increase productivity in the agriculture sector. This volume is a compilation of the papers and proceedings of the study mission. I hope that it will serve as a useful reference on the subject in APO member countries and elsewhere.

This second Compendium of Best Practices (Volume II) is a result of a year of benchmarking among participating national productivity organizations (NPOs) culminating in the 2005 APO-BPN Workshop in Bangkok, Thailand, where the NPO customer organizations shared their best practices. Volume I of the Compendium was similarly produced with best practices shared on three topics—People Performance Management, Balanced Scorecard, and Frontline Customer Service.

The best practices featured in Volume II also revolve around three topics — innovation culture, organizational excellence in SMEs, and how to do local benchmarking. To maximize productivity and competitiveness in today’s knowledge economy, a culture of innovation is critical. Promoting organizational excellence among SMEs is also imperative as they are the economic backbone of a country and major contributors to GDP. Although there are proven benefits of organizational excellence models in large organizations, concerns arise regarding their unwieldy nature and resource load when these models are applied in their raw form to small organizations. Local benchmarking is important as well to parallel international benchmarking efforts of the APO-BPN. Some NPOs have had success in implementing local benchmarking and linking this with the APO-BPN to maximize knowledge transfer in their own countries. Other NPOs want to learn how best to do it and how to support their customers in benchmarking. The Compendium uses the same format for both Volume I and II. The format consists of important knowledge base to understand the best practice in all aspects such as organizational profile, rationale and objectives of the best practice, its overall description, leading practices adopted, benefits gained, lessons learned, key performance indicators/measures, recent improvements, and next steps for continuous improvement. The best practice companies have likewise been coded for the purpose of emphasizing the best practice rather than the company. Volume II has been compiled as a result of the success of Volume I in assisting NPOs in their task of helping their customer organizations to improve. Through this Compendium, NPOs will now have the opportunity to disseminate best practice knowledge on the above topics in their own countries.

The Asian Productivity Organization (APO) is an international organization dedicated to socioeconomic development in the Asia-Pacific region through the sharing of experience to enhance productivity. This Eco-products directory 2006 is an updated version of the directories published in 2004 and 2005 in conjunction with the Eco-products international Fairs held in those years in Malaysia and Thailand, respectively. It is our pleasure to publish this updated version on the occasion of the Eco-products international Fair 2006 in Singapore. As the Asian region becomes a production hub in the global market, we can look forward to expanding green markets in Asia. I hope that this publication will contribute to an appreciation and expansion the eco-product markets in the region.    

Growing competition and globalization force business organizations to strive for greater efficiency and cost-effectiveness. In many cases, the desired results cannot be achieved without subjecting corporate strategies and structures to transformation. In this context, restructuring is no longer an option but a necessity for survival and growth. However, it is in the interest of society that restructuring be carried out in such a way that it does not jeopardize the high value of human capital. Good management practices, social partnerships, communication, and healthy industrial relations should be applied throughout the change process. This brings to the fore the issue of socially sensitive restructuring. The need for this is crucial for enterprises in Asian economies.

Over the years, the Asian Productivity Organization (APO) and the International Labour Office (ILO) have been involved in a number of joint productivity-related activities addressing not only economic but social dimensions, labor–management relations, and recently corporate social responsibility. In 2005, both institutions expressed interest in pursuing a joint project aimed at a better understanding of policy implications in the area of productivity and industrial restructuring. As a result, the joint APO–ILO Survey on Socially Sensitive Enterprise Restructuring (SSER) in Asia was undertaken. The purpose was to increase awareness of the need for SSER among Asian policymakers and enterprise managers. The main question the APO and ILO sought to answer was how an economy, a sector, or an enterprise can restructure with maximum economic benefit and minimum social cost.

The Coordination Meeting of the APO–ILO Survey on SSER in Asia was held in Vietnam, 19–23 December 2005. The meeting brought together a panel of distinguished experts from the Republic of Korea, the Republic of China, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, and the Philippines. Professor Randall S. Schuler of the USA acted as the chief expert leading the team. That group of experts agreed upon the survey framework and project methodology. After returning home, the national experts from the selected APO member countries then prepared reports covering good examples of restructuring and the overall economic, legal, social, and political environments in which those examples occurred.

This book is a compilation of the country reports prepared by the members of the study team. We hope that the contents will provide useful information for governments, employers’ and workers’ organizations, and enterprise managers, as well as academics, lecturers, and consultants.

One of the most obvious impacts of rapidly increasing urbanization and economic development can be witnessed in the form of heaps of municipal solid waste. Based on estimates, waste generation in Asia has reached 1 million tons per day. A World Bank study showed that urban areas in Asia spent USD25 million per year on solid-waste management, and this figure will increase to USD47 million per year. Despite the huge expenditures, urban areas in most APO member countries are still grappling with the challenge of preventing environmental degradation due to nonsystematic solid-waste management. Apart from the contamination of water resources and severe air pollution due to the open burning of solid waste, the health hazard is another key issue to be addressed. Solid-waste management has become an important issue in the Asia-Pacific region, and it needs to be resolved through an integrated community, privatesector, and policy-based approach.

Since recognizing the significance of solid-waste management, the APO has been organizing multicountry workshops, seminars, and conferences to discuss related issues and problems in member countries and devise solutions. A survey was conducted on solid-waste management in 11 APO member countries: Bangladesh, Republic of China, India, Islamic Republic of Iran, Malaysia, Nepal, Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Vietnam to assess current solid-waste management practices and to highlight issues, problems, and the initiatives undertaken to tackle them. This survey was also an attempt to create a consolidated database on solid waste that can be utilized for planning purposes at the national level and for strategy formulation for regional planning.

The APO has been promoting Green Productivity, i.e., the integration of productivity enhancement and environmental protection, as a method for sustainable socioeconomic development, which can help member countries adopt simple, down-to-earth measures for systematic solid-waste management. This survey also encompassed such endeavors and activities undertaken by the target countries.

This volume contains information collected during the survey on solid-waste management in the 11 countries, including waste-generation profiles, regulatory frameworks, solid-waste management governance, waste-collection and disposal mechanisms, Green Productivity activities, etc. I hope that this publication will be useful for policymakers, planners, and solid-wastemanagement professionals, giving them a better insight into the issues involved and developing a perspective for addressing them.

“The goal” is about new global principle of manufacturing. It’s about people trying to understand what makes their world tick so that can make it better. As they think logically and consistently about their problems they are able to determine “Cause and Effect” relationship between their action and the result. In the process they deduce some basic principles which they use to save their plant and make it successful.

Broadly defined as a “responsibility for business corporations to observe the social rules and contribute to the society within their scope,” CSR can lead to more sustainable corporations by encouraging good relationships with society. Although it appears natural to expect corporations to conduct business in a manner that maintains good relations with various stakeholders and improves the environment, it is not easy for all to achieve the required level of CSR.

Establishing CSR is not a simple task, nor is it free from risks and problems. CSR requires support not only from shareholders and investors but also from customers, employees, and communities. One conclusion drawn from both successful and failed examples of attempts to practice CSR is that top management must have a strong belief in the role of CSR within the organization. A lack of such belief has often led corporations to lose brand value and a good corporate image built up over many years. Bankruptcy may be even result.

Establishing sound CSR systems needs the involvement of a wide range of stakeholders, such as workers, customers, and shareholders as well as the community. Workers’ rights must be respected, and customers’ needs must be satisfied. Shareholders’ dividends must be guaranteed, and the community must be convinced of the merit of corporate activity. CSR weighs all these divergent interests and tries to strike an appropriate balance among them. I hope that the sharing of their experiences by the excellent speakers at the Top Management Forum held in March 2005 and now published in this volume will provide you with opportunities to study CSR so that your corporation can achieve long-term higher productivity and competitiveness.

I would like to take this opportunity to express my deep gratitude to the distinguished speakers at the forum. We were fortunate to have Professor Iwao Taka of Reitaku University as a keynote speaker and Mr. Hideo Suzuki from the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry as a special speaker. Both reminded the audience that the issue of CSR is relevant to all countries, developed or developing.

I also wish to express our thanks to the Japanese government for financial support and to the Japan Productivity Center for Socio-Economic Development for its assistance in organizing the forum.

I hope that readers will gain new insights from this publication on how CSR should be interpreted and implemented in the ever-developing global economy.

Among Japanese companies, the initial thrust to penetrate the world market was based on price competitiveness through the mass production of goods and services. As competition intensified globally and standards of living improved throughout the world, there was a strategic shift to producing quality goods and services. “Made in Japan” became synonymous with quality and reliability. Despite this, however, there were then only a very few Japanese brand names of worldwide renown. The watchmaking industry is a good example of the importance of brand recognition. Today, Swiss brands dominate the wristwatch market thanks to their aggressive brand management campaigns. In light of past experiences, Japanese companies realized the importance of brand management and since then the field has come a long way in the country. Among the 100 top brands listed by Interbrand, seven are Japanese. Some Japanese brands have become household words, like Sony, Toyota, Toshiba, Seiko, and others.

The current publication is a compilation of presentations made at the 2006 Top Management Forum by distinguished speakers, and it is my hope that readers will gain new insights on how Japanese corporations have made relentless efforts to achieve the essence of productivity in making “tomorrow better than today” through corporate brand management.