Review Reports - Benefits of Quality Management Standards in Organizations

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors,

I have several recommendations for you.

References: 6 references are not enough for scientific work, please, extend the number of references.
Introduction: set the reason for your study, determine the main and the structure of the paper to the end of this part. Use more references in this part to persuade the readers about the significance and the need of solved issue.
Motives and Benefits of Implementing Quality Management Standards rename to Literature review and there may be the part labelled Motives and Benefits of Implementing Quality Management Standards
Except previous point provide short literature review, I suggest including this reference for example to enrich your literature review:

Durana, P.; Kral, P.; Stehel, V.; Lazaroiu, G.; Sroka, W. Quality Culture of Manufacturing Enterprises: A Possible Way to Adaptation to Industry 4.0. Soc. Sci. 2019, 8, 124. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8040124
Conclusions: add limitations and further ways of the research.
Good luck in your future work.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your comments. Manuscript has been changed according to your recommendations:

References has been extended to 28;
Consequently, the aim of the research was to reveal what kind of motives and benefits creates implement quality management standards for organizations nowadays and evaluate if there are any changes comparing to previous research studies.

The research proved that the list of main motives and benefits for implementing quality management standards in organizations remains the same as it was revealed by previous studies: motives remains as a demand/pressure from the customers, organizations wants to increase market share, or improve quality of the product/services. Benefits in organizations reflects by decreased number of incidents, improved profitability, improved processes and procedures and etc.
The research also identified motives not mentioned in previous studies: a) organizations could not operate their business without relevant standard, or b) organizations aim to increase operational efficiency. New benefits appeared through management – after the QMS implementation, it become easier to manage organization and operational efficiency increased. (line 31-45);
Part 2 renamed to "Literature review";
Added new articles into Literature review, such as:

Echour S.; Nbigui T. Motivations related to the quality management system and benefits of its implementation in the company: state of the art // 13^th International Colloquium of Logistics and Supply Chain Management (LOGISTIQUA). Morocco, Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University, 2020.

Gremyr I.; Lenning J.; Elg M. and Martin J. Increasing the value of quality management systems // International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences. 2021, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 381–394.

Rusjan B.; Alič M. Capitalising on ISO 9001 benefits for strategic results // International Journal of Quality and Reliability management. 2010, Vol. 27, No. 7, pp. 756 – 778.

5. Limitations: The interviews were conducted with quality representatives/ experts, but not with operational level employees and the research was conducted with small amount of organizations based in Lithuania. Future research should be performed with organizations in foreign countries and interviewed with operational level employees.

Reviewer 2 Report

The work can be interesting for the readers, but the paper needs significant improvement to be properly understood.

Comments

The introduction section is too brief. It must be expanded indicating a higher number of references in the field.

In Table caption 1, it is not needed to indicate the name of the referenced author if the numerical reference [3] is indicated.

Authors indicate in line 56: “A company can be certified according to one of the ISO 9000 series standards without even having to prove that it has achieved...”. The sentence is vague since not all the ISO 9000 standards are certifiable (maybe authors refer to ISO 9001). Furthermore, authors should create a reference for each ISO standard.

The data column of Table 2 should be explained in the text before displaying the table.

The different types of questions shown in Tables 3 and 4 (column nº 4) should be defined in the text before displaying the table.

In Tables 5 and 6, it is not necessary to indicate “compiled by authors of the paper” because it is supposed to be like this unless otherwise indicated.

Tables 5 and 6 are unintuitive and difficult to interpret. The structure and content should be explained in the text (instead of in the “note”, where is not clearly defined). Furthermore, in Table 3 the first two questions are really the same.

ISO standard indicated in table 7 should be referenced. Furthermore, some mentioned standards are not really quality standards as it is indicated in the table caption (e.g., ISO 14000 is about environmental management systems, iso 27000 about information security, etc.)

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your comments. Manuscript has been changed according to your recommendations (our comments in red):

The introduction section is too brief. It must be expanded indicating a higher number of references in the field.

Added in the introduction "Consequently, the aim of the research was to reveal what kind of motives and benefits creates implement quality management standards for organizations nowadays and evaluate if there are any changes comparing to previous research studies.

The research proved that the list of main motives and benefits for implementing quality management standards in organizations remains the same as it was revealed by previous studies: motives remains as a demand/pressure from the customers, organizations wants to increase market share, or improve quality of the product/services. Benefits in organizations reflects by decreased number of incidents, improved profitability, improved processes and procedures and etc.

The research also identified motives not mentioned in previous studies: a) organizations could not operate their business without relevant standard, or b) organizations aim to increase operational efficiency. New benefits appeared through management – after the QMS implementation, it become easier to manage organization and operational efficiency increased." (line 31-45);

Also, added new articles into Literature review, such as:

Gremyr I.; Lenning J.; Elg M. and Martin J. Increasing the value of quality management systems // International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences. 2021, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 381–394.

Rusjan B.; Alič M. Capitalising on ISO 9001 benefits for strategic results // International Journal of Quality and Reliability management. 2010, Vol. 27, No. 7, pp. 756 – 778.

2. In Table caption 1, it is not needed to indicate the name of the referenced author if the numerical reference [3] is indicated.

Table 1. Internal and external quality management system implementation motives [3]. (line 70)

3. Authors indicate in line 56: “A company can be certified according to one of the ISO 9000 series standards without even having to prove that it has achieved...”. The sentence is vague since not all the ISO 9000 standards are certifiable (maybe authors refer to ISO 9001). Furthermore, authors should create a reference for each ISO standard.

ISO 9000 changed to ISO 9001 and all standards has references.

4. The data column of Table 2 should be explained in the text before displaying the table.

Table 2. Qualitative research respondents from 1 to 10, their job positions, and data collection type (line 147)

and explained before tex " Respondents – were quality representatives and experts who are directly responsible for the quality management system assurance in their organizations." (line 145-145)

5. The different types of questions shown in Tables 3 and 4 (column nº 4) should be defined in the text before displaying the table.

"Semi-standardized interview method was chosen for the research. The elements of questionnaire were compiled on the basis of the generalized list of motives and benefits provided by Vyšniauskienė L.[3]. Table 3 and Table 4 provides a list of questions that were used for the research and evaluated, if motives and benefits from the list in Table 3 and Table 4 exists in organizations, or not.

Type of motives indicates if motives are internal (MI), or external (ME).

Table 3. Elements of the questionnaire compiled to evaluate QMS implementation motives." (line 149-155)

AND

"Elements of the questionnaire compiled to evaluate benefits of quality management standards existence are provided in Table 4.

Type of benefits indicates if benefits are internal (BI), or external (BE).

Table 4. Elements of the questionnaire compiled to evaluate existence of implemented QMS benefits in organizations." (157-161)

6. In Tables 5 and 6, it is not necessary to indicate “compiled by authors of the paper” because it is supposed to be like this unless otherwise indicated.

Deleted.

7. Tables 5 and 6 are unintuitive and difficult to interpret. The structure and content should be explained in the text (instead of in the “note”, where is not clearly defined). Furthermore, in Table 3 the first two questions are really the same.

"Data of the research was systematized and provided in Table 5 and Table 6 with such a methodology – if the answers were positive and it were suitable for all respondents – it was marked with “+”symbol in Table 5 and Table 6, but if respondents evaluated that the benefits of achieved topic are not related to implemented QMS – it was marked with “/”symbol" (line 176-180)

8. ISO standard indicated in table 7 should be referenced.

All standards are referenced.

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper entitled” Benefits of Quality management standards in organizations” deals with actual and very interesting topic.

However, I have the following comments that hopefully help the authors improve their paper:

Don't use acronyms (QMS) without introduction.
What is research gap? How will this research fill the gap? The contribution of research must be more highlighted. I suggest that the authors give more introduction about why your study is important in the section of introduction.
I suggest that the authors add a research method diagram. This will provide a snapshot of the research steps followed and will help the reader in a clearer understanding of the paper.
The literature background is poor, it must be better contextualized and be more convincing.
The authors should convince the readers of this journal, that their contribution is so important. These issues deserve a deeper discussion: What are the managerial implications from this work? What are the implications for theory and practice? How decision or policy makers could benefit from this study.
The main contribution of this paper compared to the available literature needs to be better outlined.
What is the novelty of your work compared to other published papers?
As usual a final thorough proof-reading is recommended.

I encourage the author to think along those questions and to develop this work further along those lines.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your comments. Manuscript has been changed according to your recommendations (our comments in red):

1. Don't use acronyms (QMS) without introduction.

Provided acronyms in Abstract - "Quality Management Standards (QMS)" (line 19)

2. What is research gap? How will this research fill the gap?

"Consequently, the aim of the research was to reveal what kind of motives and benefits creates implement quality management standards for organizations nowadays and evaluate if there are any changes comparing to previous research studies.

The research proved that the list of main motives and benefits for implementing quality management standards in organizations remains the same as it was revealed by previous studies: motives remains as a demand/pressure from the customers, organizations wants to increase market share, or improve quality of the product/services. Benefits in organizations reflects by decreased number of incidents, improved profitability, improved processes and procedures and etc.

3. I suggest that the authors add a research method diagram. This will provide a snapshot of the research steps followed and will help the reader in a clearer understanding of the paper.

Research method sequence has been added. (line 15)

4. The literature background is poor, it must be better contextualized and be more convincing.

Added new articles into Literature review, such as:

Gremyr I.; Lenning J.; Elg M. and Martin J. Increasing the value of quality management systems // International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences. 2021, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 381–394.

Rusjan B.; Alič M. Capitalising on ISO 9001 benefits for strategic results // International Journal of Quality and Reliability management. 2010, Vol. 27, No. 7, pp. 756 – 778.

Added information in Literature review Part 2, such information as: "Internal motives, factors that drive companies to adopt a certification approach are related to anticipation and efficiency which concern the reason for improving the company’s image, internal processes, functional areas, maintaining the competitive position in time of economic crisis as well as the improvement of quality as part of the strategy of these companies [4]. (line 56-60)

Some organizations implement quality management systems based on external motives, when aiming to enter new markets, meet product export requirements, or meet customer requirements: the desire to gain a competitive advantage, the response to the future customers satisfaction as well as the use of certification in the marketing of the company in order to increase its customer portfolio [4]. (line 61-65)

The type of motivation for implementing quality management system affects the performance of the system. Organizations that focus on real quality improvements and organizational needs achieve higher benefits from their QMS implementation in areas like quality and operational improvement, compared to those organizations the implement and seek certification of their QMS for external motive, for example, image or customer requirements. Thus, a QMS implemented based upon external requirements, tends to focus more on compliance and control and less on organizational efficiency [7]. (line 73-79)

5. The authors should convince the readers of this journal, that their contribution is so important. These issues deserve a deeper discussion: What are the managerial implications from this work? What are the implications for theory and practice? How decision or policy makers could benefit from this study.

The research proved that not only the same motives and benefits for implementing QMS in organizations remains, that were revealed by previous studies, but there are other External motives – would not operate without relevant standard (ME) and internal motives – increasing operational efficiency (MI), process management (MI), demand for standardized processes (MI). Also, other benefits, such as external benefit - increased circle of customers (BE) and internal benefits – easier management of the company (BI) and increased efficiency (BI) have revealed.

6. What is the novelty of your work compared to other published papers?

Vyšniauskienė L. [3] has found that organizations have 7 internal (MI) and 10 external (ME) motives, as well as 11 internal (BI) and 7 (seven) external (BE) benefits.

Four motives that were not identified in previous research were found during this research: 1) organizations would not operate without a standard (ME), 2) improvement of operational efficiency (MI), 3) procedural management (MI) and 4) increased demand for standardized processes (MI). Current research revealed 3 (three) benefits: 1) easier management of the company (BI), 2) increased efficiency (BI), and 3) increased circle of customers (BE). (line 287-294)

Reviewer 4 Report

This is an interesting paper aimed at disclosing the benefits of quality standards through an empirical study conducted with quality representatives from organizations in different fields of business activity in Lithuania, which aimed to investigate what quality management systems prevail in organizations and to reveal the benefits and practical application of the implemented standards within them. Despite the noted strengthens, a number of revisions are required around the ‘introduction’, literature review’, ‘research methodology’ and ‘conclusions’. These are discussed as follows:

Introduction

Most concerning is that the manuscript does not yet follow general accepted scientific publication standards with respect to its structure. Important parts of any scientific publication are still missing, including a standalone ‘motivating introduction’, and ‘a structured literature review that ends in a synthesis of a clear gap within the current state of knowledge’. The current ‘Introduction’ section is just informed by 3 references and neither gives some directions to the need and actual purpose of the study.

Literature review: The literature review lacks depth and just informed by 2 references with the third previous used in the introductory section. A further, standard practice dictates that a structured literature review should end in a synthesis of a clear gap within the current state of knowledge.

Research methodology: A justification of the need of having a methodology with combined questionnaire survey and participant observation, complemented by interviews should be provided. Further, what kind of sampling approach was used to selected the Lithuanian organizations, and why? How was the reliability and trustworthiness around the thematic analysis achieved? Why is the mode of interview data collection described in the results as opposed to the research methods section?

Conclusions: The conclusion section needs to be revisited through inclusion of the emergent contributions to knowledge. Currently, this section is very narrow.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your comments. Manuscript has been changed according to your recommendations (our comments in red):

1. Introduction

The introduction has been substantially changed to this information: "Consequently, the aim of the research was to reveal what kind of motives and benefits creates implement quality management standards for organizations nowadays and evaluate if there are any changes comparing to previous research studies.

The research proved that the list of main motives and benefits for implementing quality management standards in organizations remains the same as it was revealed by previous studies: motives remains as a demand/pressure from the customers, organizations wants to increase market share, or improve quality of the product/services. Benefits in organizations reflects by decreased number of incidents, improved profitability, improved processes and procedures and etc.

2. Literature review

Added new articles into Literature review, such as:

Gremyr I.; Lenning J.; Elg M. and Martin J. Increasing the value of quality management systems // International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences. 2021, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 381–394.

Rusjan B.; Alič M. Capitalising on ISO 9001 benefits for strategic results // International Journal of Quality and Reliability management. 2010, Vol. 27, No. 7, pp. 756 – 778.

Research methodology:

The research aimed to determine which quality management standards are used in Lithuanian organizations that are operating in different fields of activity, as well as to reveal the motives for implementation and benefits of implemented standards and their practical application within the side of organizations.

The research was conducted between 23 January 2021 and 30 April 2021. Interviews were conducted with quality representatives from organizations operating in various fields of activity: manufacturers of food, electrical equipment and plastic products, service providers, cosmetics and pharmaceutical companies.

Research limits – the research involved only organizations that are operating in Lithuania in different fields of activity and that have implemented quality management systems, with their quality representatives chosen to be the respondents.

10 respondents were interviewed during the research (R1 – R10) whose data were analyzed and summarized.

Questionnaire of the research was structured on the basis of internal motives (MI), external motives (ME) Table 3, internal benefits (BI), external benefits (BE).

Respondents that participated in the research – were quality representatives and experts who are responsible for quality management system implementation and assurance in their organizations.

The interview was conducted remotely due to pandemic situation Lithuania. All respondents received the questionnaire before the interview in order to prepare properly. Half of the respondents (R1, R4, R5, R7, R8) filled the questionnaire provided answer in writing (OW). Remote interviews with other respondents were conducted via video communication platforms.

A quantitative as well as a thematic content analysis was applied to systematize the obtained qualitative research data. (line 100-123)

4. Conclusions

Extended information in Discussion part 5, such as: "The research proved that not only the same motives and benefits for implementing QMS in organizations remains, that were revealed by previous studies, but there are other External motives – would not operate without relevant standard (ME) and internal motives – increasing operational efficiency (MI), process management (MI), demand for standardized processes (MI). Also, other benefits, such as external benefit - increased circle of customers (BE) and internal benefits – easier management of the company (BI) and increased efficiency (BI) have revealed." (line 333-338)

and in conclutions: "The interviews were conducted with quality representatives/ experts, but not with operational level employees and the research was conducted with small amount of organizations based in Lithuania. Future research should be performed with organizations in foreign countries and interviewed with operational level employees." (line 391-394)

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors,

thank you for your effort. I recommend publishing in present form.

Good luck in your future research.

Reviewer 2 Report

The changes have been applied.

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript has significantly improved as compared to the previous version. Indeed, the authors tried to improve it, and the main weaknesses are solved. Furthermore, the manuscript is quite interesting and informative to PhD students of this field.

I am also satisfied with the responses and explanations given by the authors to my comments.

Thus, in my opinion, the manuscript is recommendable for publication.