Barriers to ISO 9001 implementation in Moroccan organizations: Empirical study

Bounabri, Noussaiba; El Oumri, Ahmed Amine; Saad, Elmadani; Zerrouk, Latifa; Ibnlfassi, Amina Article Barriers to ISO 9001 implementation in Moroccan organizations: Empirical study Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management (JIEM) Provided in Cooperation with: The School of Industrial, Aerospace and Audiovisual Engineering of Terrassa (ESEIAAT), Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC) Suggested Citation: Bounabri, Noussaiba; El Oumri, Ahmed Amine; Saad, Elmadani; Zerrouk, Latifa; Ibnlfassi, Amina (2018) : Barriers to ISO 9001 implementation in Moroccan organizations: Empirical study, Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management (JIEM), ISSN 2013-0953, OmniaScience, Barcelona, Vol. 11, Iss. 1, pp. 34-56, https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/188848 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management JIEM, 2018 – 11(1): 34-56 – Online ISSN: 2013-0953 – Print ISSN: 2013-8423 https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 Barriers to ISO 9001 Implementation in Moroccan Organizations: Empirical Study Noussaiba Bounabri1, Ahmed Amine El Oumri1, Elmadani Saad2, Latifa Zerrouk2, Amina Ibnlfassi1 1Université Hassan 1er, Faculté des Sciences et Techniques de Settat Laboratoire des Sciences de l’Environnement et de Développement (SED) (Morocco) 2Université Hassan 1er, Faculté des Sciences et Techniques de Settat Laboratoire Physico-chimie des Procédés et des Matériaux (PCPM) (Morocco) [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] , [email protected] Received: September 2017 Accepted: December 2017 Abstract: Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore obstacles to ISO 9001 quality management system implementation in Moroccan firms. Design/methodology/approach: A questionnaire survey has been conducted among a heterogeneous sample of 200 organizations, operating in different sectors in Morocco, yielding a response rate of 57.5%. The authors have studied barriers to quality initiatives in general and obstacles to QMS implementation in particular through an extensive literature review. Questions related to profiles of respondents, reasons of seeking certification, external consultancy and barriers to ISO 9001 implementation experienced by surveyed organizations. For the purpose of this study, authors considered three categories of quality inhibiting factors: organizational, technical and costs related barriers. Findings: Results indicate that surveyed companies sought ISO 9001 certification mainly for marketing reasons and experienced many difficulties during the implementation process. Barriers reported by respondents were mostly organizational. Resistance to change headed the list according to participants’ opinion. Also, findings highlighted the prominence of bureaucracy and poor interdependence between departments in organizations. Lack of communication, poor top management commitment and insufficient trainings were also ascertained to be obstacles to QMS implementation in Morocco. Originality/value: Earlier studies were led by different researchers in different countries about barriers to quality initiatives in general and to ISO 9001 implementation in particular. Few of those studies were conducted in Arab speaking countries but no research has been carried in Morocco. This study on obstacles to QMS implementation in Morocco will help in completing the jigsaw of difficulties faced by organizations worldwide when preparing to ISO 9001 certification. Research limitations/implications: This research is limited by the geographic context of the study Morocco, although results can be extrapolated to Arab speaking countries in general. Practical implications: The findings of this paper provide Moroccan managers with a practical understanding of the factors that are likely to obstruct ISO 9001 QMS implementation. Managers should overcome these barriers to achieve a successful implementation and higher QMS performance. Keywords: Quality management, ISO 9001, questionnaire survey, Morocco -34- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 1. Introduction In order to remain competitive, organizations must improve continuously their quality management strategies. One of the main foundations of a successful management strategy is an effective quality management system. Singhal and Singhal (2012) stated that ISO 9001, first introduced in 1987 by International organization of standardization ISO among the ISO 9000 series (Such as ISO 9000, ISO 9002. ISO 9003 and ISO 9004), is an international standard that assists more than one million organizations around the world by providing a set of requirements for developing and demonstrating an effective documented QMS. According the ISO survey (2015) 1033936 ISO 9001 certificates were issued in 2015 in 201 countries and economies around the world with an increase of 5461 in the number of certificates and 14 in the number of countries compared to 2013 as showed in Figure 1. European countries head the ranking with 439477 certified organizations while Middle East and Africa lay down the list with respectively 22761 and 12154 ISO 9001 certifications. Figure 1. ISO 9001 annual growth in number of certificates and sites worldwide Despite the fact that the QMS implementation is relatively new to the Arab world and has occurred in that region more slowly than in Western and Asian countries as stated by Zairi and Youssef (1995), according to ISO survey (2015) numbers of Arab ISO 9001 certifications are growing significantly each year as shown in (Figure 2). Figure 2 presents the numbers of certification in the Arab countries in a descending order. The country heading the Top ten ranking with the larger number of certificates in 2015 is United Arab Emirates followed by Saudi Arabia whereas morocco comes in the fifth place with 969 certified organizations. Although implementing a QMS may appear simple at first, especially given the increasing numbers of ISO 9001 certified organizations over years there are so many barriers to overcome when taking the decision of implementation. Certification does not guarantee a fluent QMS implementation, as the process brings inevitably change to the organization. Many forces acting against it create barriers, such as resistance, commitment and flexibility issues when the implemented change is not managed the best way possible. Despite the amount of research into QMS and TQM implementation barriers, most of empirical studies has been carried out by different authors in developed countries, among others, Mo and Chan (1997), Carlsson and Carlsson (1996), Lipovatz, Stenos and Vaka (1999), Fuentes, Benavent, Moreno, Cruz & Pardo del Val (2000), Glover and Siu (2000), just few in the Arab world such as Al-Khalifa and Aspinwall (2000), Curry and Kadasah (2002), Sharif -35- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 (2005), Hesham and Magd (2007), Al-Najjar and Jawad (2011) and no research study has been conducted on the topic in Morocco. Figure 2. Annual growth in numbers of certificates in Arab speaking countries The purpose of this empirical study is to highlight barriers of ISO 9001:2008 implementation in Morocco. We expect that the findings will help Moroccan organizations in particular, and Arab organizations in general, willing to get ISO 9001 certification to prepare themselves properly in order to overcome obstacles that are likely to occur during the change process and furthermore, to ensure an effective QMS implementation process and improve quality management performance. On the basis of above discussion, the following research questions arise; 1. What are motivations to ISO 9001 implementation in Moroccan organizations? 2. What are the most important barriers that obstruct ISO 9001 implementation in Moroccan organizations? 2. Literature Review 2.1. ISO 9001: Overview Quality management is the process for achieving quality as stated by Knowles (2011). World’s most widely used standard for quality management is ISO 9001. As stated by Singhal and Singhal (2012), international organization of standardization introduced in 1978 ISO 9000 series, providing a set of requirements and guidelines for developing and demonstrating an effective documented quality management system. The first version, divided to three parts, provided three models of quality management system; Part 1: Model for quality assurance in design, development, production, installation, and servicing, Part 2: Model for quality assurance in production, installation, and servicing, Part 3: Model for quality assurance in final inspection and test, and was mainly accessible for manufacturers and recognized for being immensely incomplete. (Tricker, 2016). As the popularity and the use of ISO 9000:1987 grew, in 1994, ISO realized that calling three different documents by the same name lead to confusion, so they reproduced the three «parts» and changed the names to respectively ISO 9001:1994, ISO 9002:1994 and ISO 9003:1987. Other numerous changes were intended to make the requirements more explicit and the standard easier to read. (Tricker, 2016). The 2000 version was considered a revolution to the standard and brought radical changes to the previous version. First, ISO 9001, ISO 9002 and ISO 9003 became only one standard which was ISO 9001:2000, second, ISO -36- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 abandoned the 20 sections heavy structure for just five chapters and finally many requirements were omitted, and new ones were introduced. The fourth edition of ISO 9001, published in 2008 was more of an evolution and brought minor changes of little concern to managers. It clarified the same requirements of its predecessor, was easier to use and recognized for improving consistency with other management standards such as ISO 14001. (Tricker, 2016). During the last years, we were witnessing a greater globalization, organizations were moving more towards service economy, supporting not only the great varieties of products available in the market but also the increasingly complex supply chains. Therefore, another revision of ISO 9001 standard in 2015 was crucial to reflect these evolutions. ISO released the ISO 9001:2015 edition 15 September 2015, with the following major changes (Fonseca, 2015): •A common high-level structure; •Leadership replaced the previous edition concept of management responsibility; •The concept of context of the organization; •The adoption of Risk-based-thinking; •A reinforced emphasis on process approach and intended results; •The concept of improvement replaced continual improvement, •The consideration of change management and knowledge management; The high-level structure with identical core text, terms, and definitions, was adopted, and used for all ISO management systems standards to enhance compatibility of standards, making it easier to implement new standards and integrating them into a management system. In addition, the new ISO 9001 expects more leadership and commitment from top management; he is to adopt a more proactive approach to quality management and to take more accountability for the effectiveness of the QMS. Context of the organization is also a new requirement in ISO 9001, stating an organization must consider both the internal and external issues that can impact its strategic objectives and the planning of the QMS. If there are changes in the context of the organization, in needs or trends, or in the relevant requirements of the relevant interested parties, the organization’s quality policy need to be reviewed, and the QMS changes should be planned and implemented. Moreover, in the context of ISO 9001:2015, risk based thinking requires that, both at organizational and process level, risks and opportunities which may affect the QMS and its intended results, must be identified and managed. This new approach replaces what was called preventive action in the previous standard version. In previous editions of ISO 9001, a clause on preventive action was separated from the whole, in the latest edition, prevention is inherent in all aspects of a quality management system, it is built in when the management system is risk based. The new version reduces emphasis for prescriptive requirements and documentation with stronger focus on the process approach and intended QMS results. Also, the concept of improvement replaced continual improvement allowing for periodic breakthroughs, reactive change or reorganization, or other sorts of disruptive improvements. And finally, according to ISO 9001:2015, changes need to be managed both at strategic and the operational level, across the organization, and those that are necessary to ensure that products or services continue to meet their specified requirements need to be controlled. The objectives to be achieved with the changes must be defined, the positive (and negative) implications identified, and the impacts should be accessed. It should be confirmed that the necessary resources and organizational knowledge are available and that the QMS integrity is checked and assured; We can conclude that ISO 9001:2015 edition highlights the need for managing change, when compared with the previous ISO 9001:2008. Therefore, organizations need to properly manage change to be able to effectively improve their processes and business results, as Fonseca and Domingues (2017) reported in their survey study among a representative sample of IRCA auditors worldwide. -37- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 Only few studies on the experience of ISO 9001:2015 implementation were available, researchers were more interested by the challenge of risk consideration which was the biggest change of the new 2015 edition. Rybski, Jochem and Homma (2017) held empirical study on status of preparation for ISO 9001:2015 to investigate the current status of fulfillment of the additional requirements especially the Risk based approach in German companies. Most German companies did not consider themselves well prepared due to insufficient knowledge about the new requirements included in the revised ISO9001 standard regarding risk-based thinking, the main challenge being related to the analysis and assessment of risks. Lack of competence regarding risk assessment was also ascertained to be prominent in Chiarini (2017) study among a sample of 28 certification bodies experts and quality managers from European manufacturing SMEs as results showed that the most taken into account categories of risk sources were lack of risk-based assessment, poorly trained workers and lack of skills and awareness along with internal production and supplier nonconforming products. 2.2. Barriers to Quality Initiatives Given that implementing ISO 9001 is intended to fix business processes inconsistencies through implementing a new system, it brings inevitably change to the organization. Change is an important part of business for several reasons i.e. competitiveness improvement, organizational renewal, international standards, performance maximization, innovation and technology. When an organization is experiencing change, and goes through a transformation that alters or restructures major parts of its sections, it’s called an organizational change. (Zorn, Christensen & Cheney, 1999). As stated by Hiatt and Creasey (2012), in order to have a successful organizational change, a good change management is important to ensure to get the desired results. Akdeniz (2014) reported that change management is a specific approach of management by using specific technics and tools to ensure a successful change implementation, based on prosci definition of change management as a set of processes and tools used to lead the people side of change in order to attain the desired results. When implementing change, there are always barriers that are involved, as Gill (2003) quoted, such as lack of communication, lack of top management commitment, misunderstanding of the aims and process of change and resistance. While Ackerman-Anderson and Anderson (2010) reported that leaders and employees have to integrate personal changes related to culture, behavior and mindset in organizational change to prevent failure, Paton and McCalman (2008) argued that one of the important successful change guarantors is a shared perception amongst people affected by change, regarding related issues and implications and a strong involvement and commitment to achieve desired outcome. As for implementing quality initiatives in general and implementing ISO 9001 QMS in particular, Table 1 shows the important barriers identified by various authors. Authors Research method Country and sample Identified Barriers Carlsson & Carlsson (1996) Questionnaire survey 214 ISO certified Swedish companies •Time and resources consumption in the process of implementation •Difficulties in interpreting the standard •Cumbersome and bureaucratic documentation •Difficulties in making the quality system understood and accepted •Choosing a suitable level for documentation Masters (1996) Extensive literature review USA •Lack of management commitment •Poor knowledge •Inability to change •Inadequate organizational culture •Improper planning of the implementation process -38- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 Authors Research method Country and sample Identified Barriers Ngai & Cheng (1997) Principal component analysis and correspondence analysis 179 companies in Hong Kong •Cultural and employee barrier •Infrastructure barrier •Managerial barrier •Organizational barrier Mo & Chan (1997) Questionnaire survey+ case studies Australia •Difficulty to learn and implement the standard •Unavailability of assistance to implementation •Unavailability of staff having alreadytheir «own jobs» •Difficulty of making extensive changes to the existing system Erdal & Gosh (1997) Questionnaire survey 73 turkish companies •Lack of understanding importance of certification •Unwillingness to change from the existing system •Difficulty in understanding requirements Lee, Roberts & Lau (1999) Questionnaire survey Hong Kong •Understanding of ISO standards and requirements •The change of culture of the whole company due to people resistance •Lack of resources •Staff competence Lipovatz et al. (1999) Questionnaire survey 111 Greek companies •Mentality change •Mistrust of certification •Avoiding responsibilities •Bureaucracy of documentation •Additional workload Fuentes et al. (2000) Questionnaire survey 77 certified companies 22 consultants in Spain •Difficulty of communicating new tasks and jobs •Resistance to new responsibilities, •Difficulty in cooperation, •Lack of employee’s involvement •Lack of communication. Glover & Siu (2000) Case study 2 case study companies in china •Poor commitment and motivation of workers •Low coordination and team work •Avoidance of responsibility •Lack of communication Al-Khalifa & Aspinwall (2000) Questionnaire survey 143 organizations in Qatar •Lack of training •Top management support •Human resources •Financial resources •Time Zain & Amar (2002) Questionnaire survey 78 Organizations in Indonesia •Issues related to human resources •Top management commitment •Organizational culture •Weak interdepartemental relations Curry & Kadasah (2002) Questionnaire survey 83 firms in Saoudi Arabia •The need to change the existing system •Resistance to change by employees •Lack of understanding, of ISO implementing ISO 9001 Sharif (2005) Questionnaire survey 2 case study companie in Libya •Lack of understanding and knowledge of ISO standard and QMS •Costs of certification •Lack of continuous training programs •Lack of communication Dale, Van der Wiele & Van Iwaarden (2007) General •Inadequate leadership causing employees resistance •Policies against QMS objectives •Poor management of the change process -39- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 Authors Research method Country and sample Identified Barriers Hesham & Magd (2007) Questionnaire survey 70 firms in Egypt •The need to change the existing system •Resistance to the standard introduction •Lack of understanding its importance •Costs and time consumption Bhat & Rajashekhar (2009) Questionnaire 41 organizations in India •Lack of customer orientation •Lack of planning for quality •Lack of total involvement •Lack of management commitment •Lack of resources Burcher, Lee & Waddell (2010) Questionnaire 129 Australian and 175 British companies Three main difficulties were identified for an organization when implementing quality initiatives in Australia: •Communication •Organizational inertia •Commitment. While in Britain, commitment was singled out as the most significant factor Kumar & Balakrishnan (2011) Questionnaire 100 contractors from UAE •Leadership related issues •Strategy Related Issues •Quality System related issues •Society oriented gaps Al-Najjar & Jawad (2011) Questionnaire survey 42 companies in Iraq •Top management commitment •employee resistance •Difficulty of performing internal audits •Requirements of the standards are unrealistic Khan (2011) Questionnaire survey 120 quality managers in pakistan •Lack of planning •Lack of efficient human resources practices •Inadequate infrastructure •Lack of support from leadership •Lack of customer focus Willar (2012) Questionnaire survey 77 companies in Indonesia •ISO 9001 being a matter of fulfilling audit requirements •Misleading QMS purposes •Lack of a well-design reward system Mosadeghrad (2014) Literature review 54 empirical studies wordwide •Insufficient education and training •Lack of employees’ involvement •Lack of top management support •Inadequate resources •Deficient leadership •Lack of a quality-oriented culture •Poor communication •Lack of a plan for change •Employee resistance Jayasundara & Rajini (2014) Questionnaire survey 10 ISO 9001 well experienced professionals, in Sri lanka •Lack of top management involvement during the implementation process’ •Unwillingness of employees to change work systems •Weak interdepartmental relations •Employee resistance Talib & Rahman (2015) Literature review General •Lack of communication •Lack of top-management commitment •Employee’s resistance to change •Lack of coordination between departments Table 1. Systematic review -40- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 From Table 1 there is literature to support the following points: •The shortage of Arabic studies, not one on those studies was carried out in Moroccan organizations. This supports the originality of this research and adds another contribution to the field; •Most common barriers in studies mentioned in Table 1 are: Top management related issues (lack of commitment and inadequate leadership), resistance of employees and lack of resources; •All Arabic countries mentioned in Table 1 experienced human resources barriers to QMS implementation such as issues related to understanding the purpose of ISO 9001 certification, requirements of the standard in additon to lack of competence in the field. Despite all the barriers found in the literature quality management’s benefits are no longer a secret, according to Fonseca, Domingues, Machado and Calderón (2017), a systematic review of articles published since 1996 shows that the Management Systems adoption and certification bring fairly positive benefits (average 2,34 in a 1 to 5 Likert type scale) for the certified organizations. Managing quality leads to tangible benefits such as the reduction of non-quality costs and non-added value activities and processes in addition to intangible benefits as for instance, increased customer satisfaction, maximized workforce motivation and improved environmental impact. (Knowles, 2011) Organizations are seeking ISO 9001 certification for other reasons such as costumer pressure, efficiency and competitiveness maximization, business performance, corporate image and prestige (Lipovatz et al., 1999; Ismail-Salaheldin, 2003; Beck & Walgenbach, 2003; Martínez-Costa, Martínez-Lorente & Choi, 2008; Almeida, Caten & Gutterres, 2009; Cagnazzo, Taticchi & Fuiano, 2010; Al-Refaie, Ghnaimat & Li, 2012; McCrosson, Cano, O’Neill & Kobi, 2013). 3. Research Methodology To explore the critical obstacles associated with ISO 9001 implementation in Morocco, an explorative questionnaire survey was conducted among a sample of 200 certified companies, heterogeneous in sizes, locations and sectors. The questionnaire was created and distributed online to facilitate responses collection. The survey process began on 1 April 2015 and answers were accepted until 30 April 2016. 115 responses were received (response rate of 57,5), a total of 94 responses were usable. The research tool was created after an extensive literature review on barriers to quality management in general, and difficulties in ISO 9001 implementation in particular. It was pilot tested with quality consultants and managers, then variables were approved and the form was refined to develop the final questionnaire. The questionnaire was addressed to Quality Managers. The questionnaire was divided to three sections (Annex A), the first was dedicated to information about the organization and the respondent. As for the second section, there were questions related to the actual implementation, role of consultancy, QMS documentation and the reasons behind seeking ISO 9001 certification. While the third and final section was about 32 barriers to implementation, a Likert scale was used for this section (Strongly agree, Agree, Disagree, strongly disagree or Non-applicable/not sure). A numerical transformation enabled the adoption of statistical analysis of data. The statistical analysis is based on participants’ level of agreement with each statement on a scale of 1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree. Figure 3 below presents the research structure with expected outcomes of different phases. -41- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 strategies in order to ensure a successful implementation and therefore an effective QMS. Although this article focuses only on Moroccan organizations, its findings could be extrapolated to other geographic contexts especially Arab speaking countries as literature showed various similarities in barriers to QMS implementation in the Arab world. Acknowledgments The authors are thankful to all the responding quality managers in particular and all participating organizations in general for their great collaboration. Declaration of Conflicting Interests The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Funding The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. References Ackerman-Anderson, L., & Anderson D. (2010). The change leader road map How to navigate your organization’s transformation. San Francisco: Pfeiffer. Akdeniz, C. (2014). Change management explained. Germany: First publishing. Al-Khalifa, A.K.N., & Aspinwall, E.M. (2000). The development of total quality management in Qatar. The TQM Magazine, 12(3),194-204. https://doi.org/10.1108/09544780010320250 Al-Najjar, S.M., & Jawad, M.K. (2011). ISO 9001 Implementation Barriers and Misconceptions: An Empirical Study. International Journal of Business Administration, 2(3), 118-131. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijba.v2n3p118 Almeida, M., Caten, C., & Gutterres, M. (2009). Evaluating ISO 9001:2000 Certified and Non-Certified Organizations in Brazilian Leather-Footwear Chain. Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, 6(2), 51-73. Al-Refaie, A., Ghnaimat, O., & Li, M. (2012). Effects of ISO 9001 Certification and KAAE on Performance of Jordanian Firms. Jordan Journal of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, 6(1), 45-53. Beck, N., & Walgenbach, P. (2003). ISO 9000 And Formalization–How Organizational Contingencies Affect Organizational Responses to Institutional Forces. Schmalenbach Business Review, 55(4), 293-320. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03396680 Bhat, K.S., & Rajashekhar, J. (2009). An empirical study of barriers to TQM implementation in Indian industries. The TQM Magazine, 21(3), 261-272. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542730910953031 Burcher, P.G., Lee, G.L., & Waddell, D. (2010). Quality lives on: quality initiatives and practices in Australia and Britain. The TQM Journal, 22 (5), 487-498. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542731011072838 Cagnazzo, L., Taticchi, P., & Fuiano, F. (2010). Benefits, barriers and pitfalls coming from the ISO 9000 Implementation: the impact on business performances. WSEAS Transactions on Business and Economics, 7(4), 311-321. Carlsson, M., & Carlsson, D. (1996). Experiences of implementing ISO 9000 in Swedish industry. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 13(7), 36-47. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656719610128547 -48- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 Chiarini, A. (2017). Risk-based thinking according to ISO 9001:2015 standard and the risk sources European manufacturing SMEs intend to manage. The TQM Journal, 29 (2), 310-323. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-04-2016- 0038 Curry, A., & Kadasah, N. (2002). The yin and yang of quality systems evaluation. Managerial Auditing Journal, 17(7), 424-429. https://doi.org/10.1108/02686900210437543 Dale, B.G., Van der Wiele, T., & Van Iwaarden, J. (2007). Managing quality. Victoria: Blackwell Publishing Erdal, E., & Ghosh, J. B. (1997). ISO 9000 Implementation in Turkish Industry. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 17(12), 1233-1246. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443579710182972 Fonseca, L. (2015). Relationship between ISO 9001 certification maturity and EFQM business excellence model results. Quality Innovation Prosperity, 19(1), 85-102. https://doi.org/10.12776/qip.v19i1.556 Fonseca, L (2016). FROM quality gurus and TQM to ISO 9001:2015: A review of several quality paths. International Journal for Quality Research, 9, 167-180. Fonseca, L.M., & Domingues, J.P. (2017). Listen to ISO 9001:2015 for organizational competitiveness: Correlation between change management and improvement (916-926). In proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Business Excellence. https://doi.org/10.1515/picbe-2017-0097 Fonseca, L.M., Domingues, J.P., Machado, P.B., & Calderón, M. (2017). Management system certification benefits: Where do we stand? Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 10(3), 476-494. https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2350 Fuentes, M.C., Benavent, B.F., Moreno, M., Cruz, G.T., & Pardo del Val, M. (2000). Analysis of the implementation of ISO 9000 quality assurance systems. Work Study, 49(6), 229-241. https://doi.org/10.1108/00438020010343408 Georgiev, S., & Georgiev, E. (2015). Motivational factors for the adoption of ISO 9001 standards in Eastern Europe: the case of Bulgaria. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 8(3), 1020-1050. https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.1355 Gill, R. (2003). Change management – or change leadership? Journal of Change Management, 3(4), 307. https://doi.org/10.1080/714023845 Glover, L., & Siu, N. (2000). The human resource barriers to managing quality in China. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 11(5), 867-882. https://doi.org/10.1080/095851900422320 Hesham, A., & Magd, E. (2007). ISO 9001:2000 Certification Experiences in Egyptian Manufacturing Sector: Perceptions and Perspectives. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 25(2), 173-200. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656710810846934 Hiatt, J., & Creasey, T.J. (2012). Change Management: The People Side of Change, USA: Prosci Learning Center Publications International Organization of Standardisation (ISO) (2015). ISO 9001 survey 2015. Available at: http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_9001_iso_survey2015.xls (Accessed: November 2016). Ismail-Salaheldin, S. (2003). The implementation of TQM strategy in Egypt: A field-force analysis. The TQM Magazine, 15(4),266-274. https://doi.org/10.1108/09544780310486173 Jayasundara, A.J.M.D.C., & Rajini, P.A.D. (2014). Enablers and barriers of implementing ISO 9001 Quality management system in the service sector in Sri lanka (vol. 18, abstract 896). Proceedings of the Peradeniya Univ. International Research Sessions. Sri Lanka. Khan, M.A. (2011). An empirical study in implementing total quality management in service organizations in Pakistan. Asian journal of business management studies, 2(4), 155-161. Knowles, G. (2011). Quality management. Denmark: Ventus Publishing ApS. Kumar, D.A., & Balakrishnan, V. (2011). A study on ISO 9001 quality management system (QMS) certifications – reasons behind the failure of ISO certified organizations. Journal of Research in International Business and Management, 1(6), 147-154. -49- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 Lee, S.F., Roberts, P., & Lau, W.S. (1999). Survey on ISO 9000 quality management system implementation in Hong Kong. Managerial Auditing Journal, 14(1/2), 79-88. https://doi.org/10.1108/02686909910245793 Lipovatz, D., Stenos, F., & Vaka, A. (1999). Implementation of ISO 9000 quality systems in Greek enterprises. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 16(6), 534-551. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656719910278575 Martínez-Costa, M., Martínez-Lorente, A., & Choi, T. (2008). Simultaneous consideration of TQM and ISO 9000 on performance and motivation: An empirical study of Spanish companies. International Journal of Production Economics, 113(1), 23-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2007.02.046 Masters, R.J. (1996). Overcoming barriers to TQM’s success. Quality progress, 29(5), 53-55. McCrosson, S., Cano, M., O’Neill, E., & Kobi, A. (2013). ISO 9001 Certification in UK Organisations. A comparative study of motivations and impacts. Unpublished manuscript, QUALITA 2013, Compiègne, France. Available at: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00823149/document Mo, J.P.T., & Chan, A.M.S. (1997). Strategy for the successful implementation of ISO 9000 in small and medium manufacturers. The TQM Magazine, 9(2),135-145. https://doi.org/10.1108/09544789710165581 Mosadeghrad, A.M. (2014). Factors influencing healthcare service quality. International Journal of Health Policy and Management, 3(2), 77-89. https://doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2014.65 Ngai E.W.T., & Cheng, T.C.E. (1997). Identifying potential barriers to total quality management using principal component analysis and correspondenceanalysis. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 14(4), 391-408. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656719710170657 Paton, R.A., & McCalman, J. (2008). Change management A guide to effective implementation. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Rybski. C., Jochem. R., & Homma, L. (2017). Empirical study on status of preparation for ISO 9001:2015. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 28(9-10), 1076-1089. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2017.1303886 Sampaio. P, Saraiva. P, & Rodrigues. A.G. (2009). ISO 9001 certification research: Questions, answers and approaches. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 26(1), 38-58. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656710910924161 Sharif, I.M. (2005). The Barriers Affecting the Implementation of Quality Management System-ISO 9000 in Libyan Manufacturing Public Sector Organisations. PhD Thesis. Faculty of Business and Informatics University of Salford, UK. Available at: http://usir.salford.ac.uk/14870/1/DX232487.pdf Singhal, D., & Singhal, K.R. (2012). Implementing ISO 9001:2008 quality management system A reference guide, New delhi: PHI Learning Private Limited. Talib, F., & Rahman, Z. (2015). Identification and prioritization of barriers to total quality management implementation in service industry: an analytic hierarchy process approach. The TQM Journal, 27(5), 591-615. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-11-2013-0122 Tricker, R. (2016). ISO 9001:2015 in Brief. New York: Routledge. Willar, D. (2012). Improving quality management system implementation in indonesian construction companies. PhD Thesis. Queensland University of Technology, Indonesia. Available at: http://eprints.qut.edu.au/59202/1/Debby_Willar_Thesis.pdf Zain, Z.M., & Amar, K. (2002). Barriers to implementing TQM in Indonesian manufacturing industries. The Magazine, 14 (6), 367-372. https://doi.org/10.1108/09544780210447474 Zairi, M. & Youssef, M.A. (1995). Benchmarking critical factors for TQM. Benchmarking for Quality Management & Technology, 2(2), 3-19. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635779510081616 Zorn, T., Christensen, L.T., & Cheney, G. (1999). Do We Really Want Constant Change?: Beyond the Bottom Line. San Fransisco: Berrett-Koehler-Publishers. -50- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 Annex A: Questionnaire Questionnaire Please answer the following questions by checking (x) the appropriate box or writing your answer in the space provided. Questions with (*) are mandatory. Informations on the respondent Respondent: …………………………………… Organization*: …………………………………. Organization size*: Largue Medium Small Micro Organization sector*: Service Manufacturing What is your job within the organization: Quality manager Other For how long has the organization been ISO 9001 certified?* 2 > years 2 < years < 5 5 < years Section II. Questions relating to the QMS implementation 2.1. The organization sought external consultancy for the QMS implementation* Yes No (→ 2.3) If yes What’s your opinion on external consultants’ role? Very useful Useful Quite useful Not at all useful Please justify your choice ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2.2. Who elaborated the QMS documentation?* Consultants Quality manager Both consultants and quality manager Other specify …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 2.3 What were the reasons behind ISO 9001 certification? Competitive pressure Improving the image of the organization Breaking into the international market Improving profitability -51- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 Improving products quality Maximizing customer satisfaction Improving performance Improving the overall organizational management system Other specify …………………………………………………………………………………………………. Section III. Questions relating to obstacles to QMS implementation •Please note that the barriers listed below are the most common barriers to quality initiatives in general and ISO 9001 implementation in particular. •Please tick the appropriate box: Totally disagree, disagree, agree, and totally agree or NA: Not applicable/Not sure. •The selected answer should represent your own opinion on barriers experienced during implementation in your organization. •If you have comments about the answers, please write them in the section below each answer. •If your organization has faced or is currently facing other barriers, please quote them at the end of the questionnaire. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Difficulty in understanding ISO 9001 requirements Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Unawareness of the purpose of certification within the organization Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Unawareness of the benefits of certification within the organization Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Bad experiences with previous organizational changes Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Lack of time to dedicate to the process of implementation Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Lack of employees’ knowledge on ISO 9001 standard Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. -52- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Lack of trainings Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA The QMS implementation impedes usual operations within the organization Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Lack of internal communication among staff and between staff and top management Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Insufficient requirements diffusion to all organizational levels Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Rigidity of ISO 9001 requirements Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Cost of certification Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Additional workload from the QMS Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Resistance to change Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Lack of competence Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. -53- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Lack of motivation at all levels of the organization Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Ineffective external communication Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Dominance of bureaucracy Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Lack of employees' commitment Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Difficulty in changing culture Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Existence of procedures / processes in conflict with requirements of ISO 9001 Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Poor interdependence between departments Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Difficulty in choosing a suitable level of documentation Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Implementation is a forced change rather than a mutual decision for improvement Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. -54- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Compliance with the standard is considered as solely additional documentation Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Unwillingness to change the existing system Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Difficulty in process identification and management Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Lack of top management commitment Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Lack of cooperation and team work Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Difficulty to change the existing system Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Barrier Totally disagree Disagree Agree Totally agree NA Difficulty In setting relevant quality objectives Comment: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Q: Please mention any other barrier to the QMS implementation within the organization? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… -55- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2412 Annex B: Ranking of all the assested barriers Barriers Mean Ranking Resistance to change 3.479 1 Poor interdependence between departments 3.064 2 Lack of top management commitment 3.043 3 Dominance of bureaucracy 2.947 4 Lack of internal communication among staff and between staff and top management 2.840 5 Insufficient requirements diffusion to all organizational levels 2.798 6 Lack of trainings 2.796 7 Difficulty in changing culture 2.777 8 Difficulty in process identification and management 2.630 9 Unawareness of the benefits of certification within the organization 2.482 10 Difficulty to change the existing system 2.409 11 Compliance with the standard is considered as solely additional documentation 2.395 12 Lack of employees' commitment 2.348 13 Implementation is a forced change rather than a mutual decision for improvement 2.296 14 Unwillingness to change the existing system 2.226 15 Lack of motivation at all levels of the organization 2.209 16 Unawareness of the purposes of certification within the organization 2.175 17 Difficulty of understanding ISO 9001 requirements 2.104 18 Difficulty In setting relevant quality objectives 2.070 19 Difficulty in choosing a suitable level of documentation 1.896 20 Existence of procedures / processes in conflict with requirements of ISO 9001 1.791 21 Lack of knowledge on ISO 9001 standard for employees 1.765 22 Additional workload from the QMS 1.765 22 Lack of competence 1.757 24 Ineffective external communication 1.661 25 Rigidity of ISO 9001 requirements 1.652 26 Bad experiences with previous organizational changes 1.496 27 Lack of time to dedicate to the process of implementation 1.504 27 The QMS implementation impedes usual operations within the organization 1.435 29 Cost of certification 1.435 29 Lack of cooperation and team work 1.400 31 Most important barriers Least important barriers Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 2018 (www.jiem.org) Article’s contents are provided on an Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 Creative commons International License. Readers are allowed to copy, distribute and communicate article’s contents, provided the author’s and Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management’s names are included. It must not be used for commercial purposes. To see the complete license contents, please visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. -56-