| Course | BUSI 616 Total Quality Management (BUSI616) |
|---|---|
| Module/Week | 5 |
| Assignment | Quality Tool Application |
| Paper type | Short APA paper applying one quality tool |
| Length | about 277 words, 1 double-spaced pages plus title page and references. Course guide: approximately 200 words of narrative describing how one of the seven listed quality tools has been applied to the organizational problem from Module/Week 1, with a title page and reference list in current APA format |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| Points | 50 |
| School | Liberty University Online |
| Program | MBA |
| Where it sits | Module/Week 5 in Liberty's published BUSI 616 course guide; current sections can differ |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for BUSI 616 Week 5
Two Reasons Behind Most Remakes: A Pareto Chart of Twelve Weeks of Crown Returns
[Student Name]
School of Business, Liberty University
BUSI 616: Total Quality Management
Quality Tool Application
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The dental laboratory and its twelve weeks of remake counts are composites standing in for the organization and data a student would use; the textbook and studies cited are real, and the requirements follow Liberty's public course guide for BUSI 616.
Two Reasons Behind Most Remakes: A Pareto Chart of Twelve Weeks of Crown Returns
How the Tool Was Applied
Shenandoah Dental Arts, the composite laboratory studying its 9.4 percent crown remake rate, applied a Pareto chart. Because remake slips had recorded no reasons, the intake desk first used a check sheet for twelve weeks, marking one of six reason codes on each returned crown after a technician and the dentist's note agreed on the cause. Goetsch and Davis (2016) present the Pareto chart as a way to separate the vital few causes from the trivial many, and the 262 remakes were ranked accordingly.
| Remake reason | Count | Percent | Cumulative percent |
|---|---|---|---|
| Open margin | 84 | 32.1 | 32.1 |
| Proximal contact open or tight | 61 | 23.3 | 55.3 |
| High occlusion | 39 | 14.9 | 70.2 |
| Shade mismatch | 31 | 11.8 | 82.1 |
| Fracture or chipping | 22 | 8.4 | 90.5 |
| Other, including incomplete prescriptions | 25 | 9.5 | 100.0 |
| Total | 262 | 100.0 |
What It Showed
Two categories, open margins and proximal contacts, account for 55 percent of remakes. Fixing two problems would remove more than half the remakes; fixing the other four together would remove less than half. The pattern resembles a multicenter audit of 40,344 restorations from seven laboratories, in which margin-fit discrepancies and proximal-fit issues were the two leading reasons for remakes (Alkadi et al., 2026). The two leaders share a cause the chart hints at but cannot prove: both depend on how the designer reads the scan where the margin and the neighboring teeth meet, which suggests the design step rather than milling or porcelain. Stratifying the open margins by designer and by scanner model would test that idea quickly. The "other" group also matters, since incomplete prescriptions were a recurring complaint in a national survey of laboratories (Afsharzand et al., 2006).
Next Step
A Pareto chart ranks symptoms but does not explain them. The laboratory's next step is a cause-and-effect review of open margins, which will feed the PDCA cycle in Module/Week 6. The check sheet will stay in use, so a second chart after the change can show whether the open-margin bar has actually shrunk.
References
Afsharzand, Z., Rashedi, B., & Petropoulos, V. C. (2006). Communication between the dental laboratory technician and dentist: Work authorization for fixed partial dentures. Journal of Prosthodontics, 15(2), 123-128. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2006.00086.x
Alkadi, L., Alsuhaibani, M., Altuwaijri, K., Alotaibi, S., AlAlwan, R., Almaymuni, M., Al Muhyi, N., & Farook, F. F. (2026). Prevalence and associated factors of laboratory remakes in fixed prosthodontics: A multicenter audit in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The Saudi Dental Journal, 38(2), Article 16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44445-025-00110-2
Goetsch, D. L., & Davis, S. B. (2016). Quality management for organizational excellence: Introduction to total quality (8th ed.). Pearson.
What the BUSI 616 Week 5 instructions ask
Module/Week 5 is the heaviest reading week in BUSI 616, chapters 14 to 16 of Goetsch and Davis with five presentations and three websites, and it also carries Discussion Board Forums 7 and 8. For the Quality Tool Application, students choose one of seven tools listed in the guide, the cause-and-effect diagram, check sheet, control chart, histogram, Pareto chart, scatter diagram or stratification, and apply it to the problem they have tracked since the course opened. The written part is short: about 200 words of narrative describing how the tool has been applied, plus the tool itself. The submission also needs an APA title page and reference page, and it is worth 50 points.
How this BUSI 616 Week 5 example is built
Rather than define the Pareto principle, the sample shows the tool doing its job. It begins by explaining how the data were gathered, a check sheet with six reason codes attached to every returned case for twelve weeks, then presents the ranked table with counts, percentages and cumulative percentages that a Pareto chart would plot as bars and a line. The narrative points to the vital few, open margins and proximal contacts at 55 percent together, and sets them against the leading reasons in Alkadi and colleagues' audit of more than 40,000 restorations. It closes by naming what the chart cannot show, the root cause, and the tool that comes next.
BUSI 616 Week 5 grading rubric: where the points go
The assignment is judged on correct use of the chosen tool and on a narrative that explains how the tool was applied to the student's own problem, not on a definition of the tool. For a Pareto chart, graders expect categories ranked from largest to smallest with "other" last, counts and cumulative percentages that add correctly and a conclusion about the vital few causes. The narrative should state where the data came from and over what period, interpret the result and say what it means for improvement. Linking the result to the organization's earlier assignments shows an integrated TQM project. Length near 200 words, clear writing and APA formatting of the title page, any citations and the reference list complete the grade.
BUSI 616 Week 5 help: mistakes that cost points
Many submissions describe all seven tools or explain what a Pareto chart is in general, which uses up the word count without applying anything. Choose one tool and show it with your organization's data, even if the data are a small sample. Check your arithmetic: percentages must sum to 100 and the cumulative column must end there. Put "other" last even if it is larger than a named category. Say what the tool does not tell you; a Pareto chart ranks symptoms but does not find causes, which leads naturally to a fishbone diagram or the PDCA paper in Module/Week 6. Keep the narrative near 200 words and let the table carry the numbers.
Related BUSI 616 sample papers
Other BUSI 616 weeks
- BUSI 616 Week 1: Deming vs. Crosby Philosophies
- BUSI 616 Week 2: Partners, Alliances and Culture
- BUSI 616 Week 3: Internal and External Customers
- BUSI 616 Week 4: Training Needs Analysis
- BUSI 616 Week 6: PDCA Cycle for Open Margins
- BUSI 616 Week 7: Change Management Strategy
- BUSI 616 Week 8: TQM Presentation: First-Time Fit
More MBA sample papers
- BUSI 610 Week 5: Annotated Bibliography: Flat Firms
- BUSI 613 Week 5: Article Review 4: Reshoring
- BUSI 614 Week 5: Forum 2: Big Data and Surveys
- BUSI 615 Week 5: Forum 3: Integrated Systems
BUSI 616 Week 5 questions, answered
What is the BUSI 616 Quality Tool Application assignment?
A 50-point Module/Week 5 assignment applying one of seven quality tools, such as a Pareto chart, fishbone diagram or control chart, to the problem chosen in Module/Week 1, with about 200 words of narrative and an APA title page and reference list.
Where can I find a free BUSI 616 Week 5 sample paper?
A complete BUSI 616 Week 5 Quality Tool Application is on this page: a Pareto analysis of 262 crown remakes at a dental laboratory with counts, cumulative percentages and a short narrative.
What is a Pareto chart used for?
It sorts the kinds of failure by how often each occurs, tallest bar first, and adds a running total line, so a team can see at a glance which two or three kinds make up the bulk of the problem.
Which quality tools can be used in BUSI 616?
The guide lists seven: cause-and-effect diagram, check sheet, control chart, histogram, Pareto chart, scatter diagram and stratification, noting that some lists substitute a flowchart or run chart for stratification.
What are the most common reasons for dental crown remakes?
A large multicenter audit of laboratory remakes found that margin fit, proximal fit and overall fit problems were the leading reasons, with patterns that differed by material and restoration type.
Use it as a model, or ask for your own
This paper is an original model written by our desk for study. It is not a submitted student paper and not an official Liberty University document. Read it for structure and reasoning, then write your own to the instructions in your Canvas course. If you want a version built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
Ask for a custom BUSI 616 Week 5 sample · All BUSI 616 weeks · All courses