school of social sciences dissertation

SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES Master in Business Administration (MBA)

DISSERTATION

Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises

STUDENT: VICTORIA TSOLIDOU

SUPERVISOR: ANASTASIOS MAGOUTAS

Patras, June 2017

ΣΧΟΛΗ ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΚΩΝ ΕΠΙΣΤΗΜΩΝ Πρόγραμμα Μεταπτυχιακών Σπουδών στη Διοίκηση Επιχειρήσεων (MBA)

ΔΙΠΛΩΜΑΤΙΚΗ ΕΡΓΑΣΙΑ

Η επίδραση της οικονομικής κρίσης στη Διαχείριση Ποιότητας των Ελληνικών επιχειρήσεων

ΦΟΙΤΗΤΡΙΑ: ΒΙΚΤΩΡΙΑ ΤΣΟΛΙΔΟΥ

ΕΠΙΒΛΕΠΩΝ: ΑΝΑΣΤΑΣΙΟΣ ΜΑΓΚΟΥΤΑΣ

Πάτρα, Ιούνιος 2017

© Ελληνικό Ανοικτό Πανεπιστήμιο, 2017 Η παρούσα Εργασία καθώς και τα αποτελέσματα αυτής, αποτελούν συνιδιοκτησία του ΕΑΠ και του φοιτητή, ο καθένας από τους οποίους έχει το δικαίωμα ανεξάρτητης χρήσης, αναπαραγωγής και αναδιανομής τους (στο σύνολο ή τμηματικά) για διδακτικούς και ερευνητικούς σκοπούς, σε κάθε περίπτωση αναφέροντας τον τίτλο και το συγγραφέα της Εργασίας καθώς και το όνομα του ΕΑΠ όπου εκπονήθηκε.

Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises

STUDENT: VICTORIA TSOLIDOU

Supervisory Dissertation Committee: Supervisor A:

Supervisor B:

Dr. Anastasios Magoutas

Dr. Panagiotis Chountalas

Hellenic Open University

Hellenic Open University

Patras, June 2017

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This journey would not have been possible without the support of my family, professors and mentors. To my family, thank you for encouraging me in all my pursuits and inspiring me to follow my dreams. Thank you to all the Greek associations, certification agencies contacted and chamber members that have contributed to the survey, without your participation we could not have done the research. I would also like to thank my dissertation supervisor, Dr. Anastasios Magoutas, for the inspiration and the guidance he has shown during the preparation of this dissertation.

Dissertation

iv


ΠΕΡΙΛΗΨΗ

Η παρούσα διπλωματική εργασία εξερευνά τον αντίκτυπο της οικονομικής κρίσης στην διαχείριση και διατήρηση των Συστημάτων Διαχείρισης Ποιότητας και άλλων μοντέλων Στρατηγικής Διοίκησης Ποιότητας των Ελληνικών επιχειρήσεων. Για την επίτευξη αυτού του σκοπού, αναλύεται η διεθνής βιβλιογραφία σχετικά με το οικονομικό γίγνεσθαι της Ελλάδας από την περίοδο της κρίσης μέχρι σήμερα καθώς και των διαφορετικών μοντέλων Διοίκησης και Διαχείρισης Ποιότητας που εφαρμόζονται στην Ελληνική επικράτεια. Επιδιώκεται η διερεύνηση των κινήτρων, οφελών και προκλήσεων που αντιμετωπίζουν οι Ελληνικές επιχειρήσεις κατά την υλοποίηση και διατήρηση τους. Η μεθοδολογική προσέγγιση της έρευνας βασίζεται στην επεξεργασία πρωτογενών δεδομένων. Διεξάγεται ερωτηματολόγιο που απευθύνεται σε Διευθυντές και στελέχη Ποιότητας ελληνικών πιστοποιημένων εταιρειών διαφορετικών κλάδων με στόχο την δυνατότητα σύγκρισης. Η ανάλυση των αποτελεσμάτων της έρευνας βασίζεται κυρίως σε μοντέλα περιγραφικής στατιστικής και ανάλυσης συχνοτήτων. Εξετάζεται εάν οι ευρύτερες δράσεις αντιμετώπισης της κρίσης επιδρούν στη λειτουργία των συστημάτων Διαχείρισης Ποιότητας και των μοντέλων Διοίκησης Ποιότητας και αν οι τρέχουσες συνθήκες έχουν κατευθύνει τα μελλοντικά τους σχέδια για διατήρηση ή και για διεύρυνση αυτών. Συνοπτικά, η μελέτη αυτή επιχείρησε να δρέψει τα κομμάτια που διαπλάθουν το προφίλ του στρατηγικού σχεδιασμού της ποιότητας των Ελληνικών επιχειρήσεων και της θέσης των Συστημάτων Διαχείρισης ποιότητας και των άλλην μοντέλων ως σύνεργα εξόδου από την κρίση. Τα ουσιαστικότερα συμπεράσματα που πηγάζουν από την παρούσα εργασία είναι ότι οι ελληνικές εταιρείες διατηρούν μια θετική άποψη σε σχέση με το μέλλον των πιστοποιήσεων ποιότητας των επιχειρήσεων τους. Επίσης αναγνωρίζουν τη σημασία των μοντέλων Στρατηγικής Διοίκησης Ποιότητας, αν και αντιμετωπίζουν δυσκολίες κατά την υλοποίηση και διατήρηση τους.

Dissertation

v


ABSTRACT This thesis attempts to shed light into the effect of the Greek economic recession upon several dimensions of quality in Greek business environment. The economic crisis has devastated the Greek enterprises with austerity methods which were led by the government ensuing in momentous budget wounds for quality. Economic recession is being presented along with the implementation of Quality management systems (QMS) and Quality Improvement (QI) models in Greek area. Our approach is based to obtaining primary data through questionnaire from Quality managers and quality supervisors of Greek companies in different sectors. Our analysis is based on descriptive statistics, Factor Analysis, Chi-Square test and Cross Tabulation Analysis. Our research aims to investigate what was the effect in Operational excellence and what strategies have been involved during current turbulent era in order to maintain current or future quality levels. Concluding, will try to study the impact of the recession on attitudes towards the view of QMS (quality management systems) as well as other Quality Improvement programs (Lean, Six Sigma, Kaizen, TQM, BPR etc) as a strategy and their application to exit crisis. The key outcomes from the research was that the Greek companies keep a good momentum regarding the maintenance of QMS in near future. They recognize the importance of QI programs even though they are facing challenges during implementation & maintenance.

Dissertation

vi


Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... iv ΠΕΡΙΛΗΨΗ ........................................................................................................................ v ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................... vi List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... x List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... xi List of Images ................................................................................................................... xii List of Abbreviations ........................................................................................................ xii 1

2

INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1 1.1

Introduction to the topic of the study ................................................................ 1

1.2

Research Aims and Objectives ............................................................................ 1

1.3

Research Approach ............................................................................................. 2

1.4

Rationale for the study and the contribution to the field .................................. 2

1.5

Dissertation Outline ............................................................................................ 3

LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................... 4 2.1

Business entities profile in Greece...................................................................... 4

2.2

Economic recession............................................................................................. 6

2.2.1

What is Financial and Economic Crisis ........................................................ 6

2.2.2

Historical revolution of crisis ...................................................................... 7

2.2.3

Economic and financial crisis in Greece ...................................................... 7

2.2.4

Reasons and impact of economic crisis in Greece ...................................... 9

2.2.5 Relationship of Greek enterprises during recession and Quality management ............................................................................................................. 11 2.2.6

Business strategies and economic recession ............................................ 12

2.3

Quality ............................................................................................................... 13

2.4

Quality in Greece .............................................................................................. 15

2.5

Quality Management Systems .......................................................................... 16

2.5.1

Definitions of Quality management systems ............................................ 17

2.5.2

Motives for implementation of QMS and challenges ............................... 21

2.5.3

ISO 9001 – Quality Management Systems ................................................ 22

2.5.4

ISO 14001:2015 Environmental management systems ............................ 26

Dissertation

vii

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises 2.5.5

ISO 13485:2016 Medical Devices .............................................................. 27

2.5.6

ISO 27001:2013 Information security management systems................... 28

2.5.7 IFS, BRC, ISO 22000: 2005 /HACCP Certification of food safety management systems ............................................................................................... 29 2.5.8 OHSAS 18001:2007 & ISO / DIS 45001 – Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S) Management System ................................................................................... 32 2.6

2.6.1

Motives for implementation of QI programs and challenges ................... 35

2.6.2

TQM – Total Quality Management ........................................................... 35

2.6.3

BPR – Business process Reengineering ..................................................... 40

2.6.4

LEAN .......................................................................................................... 41

2.6.5

KAIZEN ....................................................................................................... 45

2.6.6

SIX SIGMA.................................................................................................. 46

2.6.7

EFQM – EUROPEAN FOUNDATION FOR QUALITY MANAGEMENT ........... 50

2.7 3

4

Summary ........................................................................................................... 53

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................................................ 54 3.1

Research design ................................................................................................ 54

3.2

Measurement procedures ................................................................................ 54

3.3

Data collection instruments .............................................................................. 55

3.3.1

Development of the questionnaire........................................................... 55

3.3.2

Structure of the questionnaire ................................................................. 55

3.4

Data analysis method........................................................................................ 56

3.5

Research Limitations ......................................................................................... 56

3.6

Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 57

DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ..................................................................... 58 4.1

Introduction ...................................................................................................... 58

4.2

Methods of data analysis and presentation of data ......................................... 58

4.3

Discussion of findings........................................................................................ 58

4.3.1

Reliability analysis of research findings .................................................... 59

4.3.2

Descriptive Statistics ................................................................................. 60

4.3.3

Contingency tables .................................................................................... 66

4.4 5

Quality Improvement Programs ....................................................................... 33

Summary ........................................................................................................... 77

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................. 78

Dissertation

viii

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises 5.1

Summary of the dissertation ............................................................................ 78

5.2

Research Contributions..................................................................................... 80

5.3

Recommendations for Research ....................................................................... 80

References ......................................................................................................................... 81 APPENDIX A - SURVEY................................................................................................ 96 APPENDIX B – DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS ............................................................ 114 DEMOGRAPHIC INFO ................................................................................................. 114 PART A .......................................................................................................................... 120 PART B........................................................................................................................... 123 PART C........................................................................................................................... 126 APPENDIX C - STATISTICAL TESTS ........................................................................ 129 POWER AND SAMPLE SIZE ....................................................................................... 129 QUESTIONNAIRE RELIABILITY ANALYSIS - Cronbach's alpha ........................... 131 CROSS TABULATION ANALYSIS ............................................................................ 146 APPENDIX D – DATA COLLECTION ........................................................................ 218

Dissertation

ix


List of Figures

Figure 2-1 Public sector employment as a percentage of total employment (2009 and 2013) – adapted from ( Figure 3.1) Government at a Glance 2015 - © OECD 2015 .......... 6 Figure 2-2 Quality perspectives (Garvin, 1988) ................................................................ 14 Figure 2-3 Eight Dimensions of Quality (Garvin, 1987)..................................................... 14 Figure 2-4 Changing views of quality (Kerzner, 2009) ...................................................... 15 Figure 2-5 ISO Certifications Greece 1993 – 2015 (International Organization for Standardization, 2015) ...................................................................................................... 19 Figure 2-6 ISO Certifications of Greece 2008- 2015 (International Organization for Standardization, 2015) ...................................................................................................... 20 Figure 2-7 Quality Management Principles of ISO 9001:2015 (Prince Sultan Aviation Academy, 2016) ................................................................................................................ 23 Figure 2-8 Representation of the structure of ISO 9001 International Standard in the PDCA cycle. (International Organization for Standardization, 2016, p. 10)...................... 25 Figure 2-9 TQM as a Management System Consisting of Values, Methodologies and Tools – adapted from Figure 3 (Hellsten & Klefsjö, 2000, p. 241) .................................... 36 Figure 2-10 The elements of TQM (Westcott, 2006) ........................................................ 37 Figure 2-11 Deming's 14 Key principles (Deming, 1986, pp. 23-24) ................................. 38 Figure 2-12 Similarities and differences between TQM, Six Sigma and lean (Andersson, et al., 2006) ........................................................................................................................... 39 Figure 2-13 Practical framework on BPR- adapted from Figure 2 (Motwani, et al., 1998, p. 969) ............................................................................................................................... 41 Figure 2-14 Toyota Production System (Lean Enterprise Institute, 2016)........................ 42 Figure 2-15 The Boeing Production System and the Boeing Quality Management System (The Boeing Company, 2003) ............................................................................................ 43 Figure 2-16 Lean – a framework adapted from Figure 2. (Hines, et al., 2014, p. 1007) ... 44 Figure 2-17 Kaizen umbrella adapted from (Imai, 1986, p. 4) .......................................... 45 Figure 2-18 Integration of Six Sigma and QMS depicted from Figure 1 (Pfeifer, et al., 2004, p. 247) ..................................................................................................................... 48 Figure 2-19 Specific common tools to implement Lean, Six Sigma and Lean Six Sigma depicted from Figure 3. (Chaurasia, et al.,2016) .............................................................. 49 Figure 2-20 Fundamental Concepts of Excellence of the EFQM depicted from (EFQM, 2017, p. 3) ......................................................................................................................... 50 Figure 2-21 The EFQM Excellence Model depicted from (EFQM, 2017, p. 4) .................. 51 Figure 2-22 Radar Approach depicted from (EFQM, 2017, p. 6) ...................................... 51 Figure 2-23 Remarkable differences between ISO and EFQM as depicted from (EFQM, 2017, p. 11) ....................................................................................................................... 52

Dissertation

x

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Figure 4-1 Early-stage entrepreneurial activity (TEA) index according to (FOUNDATION FOR ECONOMIC & INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH, 2016) ........................................................... 60 Figure 4-2 Enterprises not certified yet per age ............................................................... 62 Figure 0-1 Statistical Classification by Activity ................................................................ 114 Figure 0-2 Administrative Region ................................................................................... 116 Figure 0-3 Company age ................................................................................................. 117 Figure 0-4 Enterprise size according to persons employed ............................................ 118 Figure 0-5 Job title .......................................................................................................... 119 Figure 0-1 Which QMS do you use? ................................................................................ 120 Figure 0-2 Years since first certification.......................................................................... 120 Figure 0-3 Reasons / motives of implementing QMS ..................................................... 121 Figure 0-4 Perceived benefits from QMS and overall satisfaction rate .......................... 121 Figure 0-5 Overall satisfaction regarding implementation of QMS ................................ 122 Figure 0-6 Motives vs Perceived value QMS ................................................................... 122 Figure 0-1 Impact of economic recession to the issuance and maintenance of QMS certificates in Greece ...................................................................................................... 123 Figure 0-2 Impact of economic recession to quality of products and/or services ......... 123 Figure 0-3 Business strategy selection during economic turndown ............................... 124 Figure 0-4 Status of QMS certificates during recession .................................................. 124 Figure 0-5 QMS certifications in 2020 ............................................................................ 125 Figure 0-6 Challenges to renew or issue QMS certificate during Economic Recession .. 125 Figure 0-1 Which QI program do you use? ..................................................................... 126 Figure 0-2 Overall satisfaction from the implementation of QI programs ..................... 127 Figure 0-3 How many years do you use the QI programs............................................... 127 Figure 0-4 Reasons/ motives for Implementation QI programs ..................................... 128 Figure 0-5 Impact of Economic recession to QI programs.............................................. 128 Figure 0-6 Challenges during implementation of QI programs ...................................... 129

List of Tables Πίνακας 2-1 Criteria for medium, small and micro -sized enterprises (Eurostat 2016) ..... 4 Πίνακας 2-2 Number of enterprises, persons employed and gross value added (GVA) and the share of SMEs, 2012 (Eurostat, 2016) .......................................................................... 5 Πίνακας 2-3 Unemployment rate by International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, April 2017 (International Monetary Fund, 2017).............................. 10 Πίνακας 2-4 At-risk-of poverty or social exclusion rate, 2014 and 2015(%) – adapted fromFigure 1. (Eurostat, 2016).......................................................................................... 10 Πίνακας 2-5 ISO Certificates (International Organization for Standardization, 2016): .... 19 Πίνακας 2-6 ISO Certifications of Greece per sectors 2015 (International Organization for Standardization, 2015) ...................................................................................................... 20

Dissertation

xi

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Πίνακας 2-7 % of ISO Certifications of Greece 2015 (International Organization for Standardization, 2015) ...................................................................................................... 21 Πίνακας 2-8 Comparison of Six Sigma and quality management systems depicted from Table I (Pfeifer, et al., 2004, p. 246) .................................................................................. 47 Πίνακας 4-1 Reliability Statistics ....................................................................................... 59 Πίνακας 4-2 QMS overall satisfaction Cross tabulation analysis ...................................... 68 Πίνακας 4-3 QMS overall satisfaction vs QMS benefits and Motives............................... 69 Πίνακας 4-4 Better selection of supplier’s strategy.......................................................... 70 Πίνακας 4-5 Decrease cost of production strategy .......................................................... 70 Πίνακας 4-6 Develop and train staff strategy ................................................................... 71 Πίνακας 4-7 Extroversion strategy.................................................................................... 71 Πίνακας 4-8 Focus on quality strategy.............................................................................. 71 Πίνακας 4-9 Improve productivity and operational restructuring strategies................... 72 Πίνακας 4-10 Reduced staff level strategy ....................................................................... 72 Πίνακας 4-11 Renegotiate relationships with customers strategy................................... 73 Πίνακας 4-12 Search of new sales and synergies strategies ............................................ 73 Πίνακας 4-13 Relationship of QI programs overall benefit .............................................. 74 Πίνακας 4-14 Relationship of QI and strategies during Economic Recession .................. 75 Πίνακας 4-15 Relationship of QMS and QI programs ....................................................... 76 Πίνακας 4-16 Relationship of difficulties vs QMS & QI .................................................... 77 Πίνακας 0-1 Power and sample size ............................................................................... 129 Πίνακας 0-1 2.Relationship of QMS with strategies employed during economic recession ........................................................................................................................................ 173

List of Images

Εικόνα 1 Athens Chamber Commerce & Industry newsletter.............................218 Εικόνα 2 Chamber of Commerce of Evros Newsletter........................................219 Εικόνα 3 Chamber of Commerce of Ileia Newsletter ..........................................220 Εικόνα 4 Samos chamber of Commerce Newsletter ...........................................221 Εικόνα 5 TUV Austria Hellas Newsletter............................................................222

List of Abbreviations

ASQ – American Society for Quality BRC – British Retail Consortium

Dissertation

xii


BPR – Business process reengineering CEN – European Committee for Standardization CENELEC – European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization CI – Continuous Improvement CSF – critical success factor DMAIC – Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control DPMO – Defects Per Million Opportunities EFET – Hellenic Food Authority EFQM– European Foundation for Quality Management EFSA – European Food Safety Authority ELGO – Hellenic Agricultural Organization (HAO) ELOT – Hellenic Organization for standardization ESYD – National Accreditation System ESYP – National Quality and Infrastructure System EMAS – Eco–Management and Audit Scheme EMS – Environmental Management System EQA – European Quality Award ETSI – European Telecommunications Standards Institute GDP – gross domestic product GMP – Good Manufacturing Practices HACCP – Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point HDI – Human Development Index HQF – Hellenic Quality Forum HMA – Hellenic Management Association IEC – International Electrotechnical Commission IFS – International Featured Standard ILO – International Labor Organization ISMS – Information Security Management System ISO – International Organization for Standardization LEI – Lean Enterprise Institute

Dissertation

xiii


LSS – Lean Six Sigma MBNQA – Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award MNC – Multinational Corporation NQIS – National Quality Infrastructure System NSO – National Standards Organization OECD – Organization for Economic Co–operation and Development OHSAS – Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S) Management System QM – Quality management QMP – Quality management principles QMS – Quality management system QS – Quality system QI – Quality improvement PDCA – Plan, do, check, act PPP – purchasing power parity R&D – Research and Development SDCA – Standard, do, check, act SME – Small and Medium–sized Enterprises SPC – Statistical Process Control methods TQC – Total Quality Control TQM Total Quality Management VOB – Voice of Business VOC – Voice of Customer VOP – Voice of Process UEAPME – Union Européenne de l’Artisanat et des Petites et Moyennes Entreprises

Dissertation

xiv


1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction to the topic of the study Greece struggles with the gravest economic slump for 9 years now, affecting all major sectors. The socioeconomic environment has been severely impacted by the reduced income & unemployment, the government deficit, and debt. During these harsh times, companies are battling to keep alive and maintain their competitive advantage. Quality is being under review and the analysis of quality improvement strategies employed during a recession is being investigated. According to European Commission (Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), 2017) Greece in 3 rd quarter of 2016 shows signs of recovery and its economy has been gradually growing by 0.8%. Growth was primarily driven by private consumption, investment, and exports. Economic activity is up in the industry, the retail sector, and tourism, while exports have also recuperated strength since the shock in 2015.

1.2 Research Aims and Objectives The main purpose of this research is principally entrenched in the title of this research and it is primarily to accomplish the following: •

Explore the QMS application in Greek organizations during recession period

•

Investigate about the Quality Improvement programs and methodologies in Greek enterprises as a strategy during economic crisis

Thus, the aim entails that some key objectives should be framed to reach the mission of this research. These objectives would be to:

Dissertation

1


•

Shed the light on the motivations behind certification of QMS and QI programs

•

Investigate and measure the organization satisfaction levels with different parameters regarding implementation of QMS and/or QI programs

•

Analyze the impact of economic crisis on the maintenance and issuance of new QMS certifications and/or implementation of QI programs

•

Analyze the impact of recession towards Quality of products and services and the strategies employed.

•

Investigate the adversities towards the upkeep of QMS and/or QI programs

1.3 Research Approach This study is based on the data of a cross-sectoral survey conducted in Greece in 2017. The survey was sent to all Greek Chambers of Commerce and Associations, which forwarded it to all its members and 439 companies participated. The questionnaire was piloted in English before the main data collection phase during December 2016 and went live in a revised mode in Greek during January 2017 to March 2017. Chi-square tests were used to explore the association of reasons behind the implementation of QMS and QI programs, region and sector, motives, benefits, challenges and strategies.

1.4 Rationale for the study and the contribution to the field The intent of this study is to contribute to the overall knowledge base about Quality in Greek enterprises. Specifically, this study focuses on how the Greek companies manage and respond to the economic recession and how they are employing QMS and QI programs as an overpass during this period. The study approaches all types and sizes of companies in Greek area and tries to investigate how important is quality during a recession. In addition, it is analyzed if and how much they invest in quality by implementing a QMS or QI program and if this

Dissertation

2


investment is worth. Moreover, we explore if the benefits they are receiving from the QMS and QI programs are enough to survive and to prospect on future and what challenges they are facing. All these above-mentioned terms have been previously investigated individually or in combination worldwide, but to date, there has not been identified a full-scale academic research of Quality in crisis on a national level. Therefore, the purpose of this thesis is to clarify the positive or negative effect and identify potential areas for future research.

1.5 Dissertation Outline This dissertation consists of 5 Chapters. Chapter 1 introduces to the topic of the study, it elucidates the Research Aims and Objectives, it defines the Research Approach and describes the Rationale for the Study, in addition to the contribution to the field. In the last part of the Chapter, an outline of the dissertation is being provided. Chapter 2 provides a widespread critical literature review of the topic. The first part of the chapter presents an overview of the Greek enterprises, presenting the historical economic recession background in Greece. The last part of this chapter discusses the QMS and QI practices in Greece and provides a summary. In the second, key terms are scrutinized and the designated dimensions of QMS and QI programs are explored. Following to the literature review, Chapter 3 delivers the Methods and Methodology of this research. The Research Design is settled and the Sample Selection and Size is offered. The Instrument used is described, with the explanation of the Data Collection Process and of the Measurements methods. The chapter conclusions with the description of the analysis for the findings. Chapter 4 offers a wide-ranging report of the Findings. The statistical description of the findings and correlation analysis are introduced in Tables and Graphs. The overall findings are conversed. Chapter 5 delivers the summary conclusions and the Research contributions are conversing. The chapter and the dissertation ends with recommendations on further research and expansion of the topic.

Dissertation

3


2 LITERATURE REVIEW The previous chapter introduced the research of this study. This chapter aims to review literature and research studies allied with the implementation of Quality Management Systems and Quality Improvements programs. The economic environment of Greek enterprises is presented from the commencement of recession till nowadays. The relationship of crisis and quality management is being attempted. The concepts of economic recession, Quality, Quality Management Systems and Quality Improvement Programs are being exposed in this chapter.

2.1 Business entities profile in Greece Greece is a developed country with an economy based on the service (80.9%), industrial sectors (15%) and agriculture (4.1%). The main trades are tourism, food and tobacco processing, textiles, chemicals, metal products; mining, petroleum (Central Intelligence Agency, 2016). In Greece, 86.5 % of private employment is concerted in SMEs and more than 50 % in micro enterprises (0-9 employees). According to (Eurostat, 2016) small and medium-sized enterprises, abbreviated as SMEs include fewer than 250 persons employed. The SMEs are subdivided further as per below table. Large enterprises are the ones with 250 or more persons employed). Πίνακας 2-1 Criteria for medium, small and micro -sized enterprises (Eurostat 2016) Enterprise category

Persons employed

Turnover or

Balance sheet total

Medium

< 250

≤ € 50 m

≤ € 43 m

Small

< 50

≤ € 10 m

≤ € 10 m

Micro

< 10

≤€2m

≤€2m

As we see from the below table SMEs represent 99.9% of the total number of active enterprises in Greece and are those who have been impacted most by the recent crisis.

Dissertation

4

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Πίνακας 2-2 Number of enterprises, persons employed and gross value added (GVA) and the share of SMEs, 2012 (Eurostat, 2016)

Greece public sector, relative to country’s size and economy, is relatively large and ranks among the upper in EU in comparison with its size. On top of the public sector, there are large and mid-sized companies that are directly or indirectly controlled by state. (OECD, 2015)

Dissertation

5


Figure 2-1 Public sector employment as a percentage of total employment (2009 and 2013) – adapted from ( Figure 3.1) Government at a Glance 2015 - © OECD 2015

2.2 Economic recession The global economic and financial crisis that hit the world has conditioned the business environment and has given a sign of how delicate a global financial system that depends on financial markets only. The capitalist system failed to respond in this uncontrolled input that strongly affected firm performance. The main characteristics of the current crisis are: decrease in credit available, drop in consumer spending, boost of unemployment, noteworthy focus towards creating cost efficiencies within the corporations, drop in shareholder value and lower return on investments (Stiglitz, 2009). 2.2.1 What is Financial and Economic Crisis As per (Reinhart & Rogoff, 2009, pp. 4-5) “crisis is defined by quantitative thresholds: Inflation, Currency Crashes, and Debasement”. According to (Mishkin, 1991), “a financial crisis is a disruption to financial markets in which adverse selection and moral hazard problems become much worse so that financial markets are unable to efficiently channel funds to those who have the most productive investment opportunities”. (Fink, 1986, p. 15) though defined crisis differently as a desirable outcome, “…an unstable time or state of affairs in which a decisive change is impending – either one

Dissertation

6


with the distinct possibility of a highly undesirable outcome or one with the distinct possibility of a highly desirable and extremely positive outcome. It is usually a 50-50 proposition, but you can improve the odds.” Economic crisis is the wide-ranging, severe and long run economic slump that includes credit, financial, fiscal, currency crisis, and hyperinflation. (Claessens & Kose, 2013) According to (Fink, 1986, pp. 20-8) the organization passes through four phases, the prodromal crisis stage, the acute crisis stage, the chronic crisis stage and the crisis resolution stage. Successful organization are the ones that can recognize these phases and adapt their strategies accordingly. 2.2.2 Historical revolution of crisis According to (European Commission , 2009) current crisis is a perfect storm. No other economic recession since World War II has been so serious and deep as the 2008 recession. There are strong likenesses among the 1907-08, 1929-35 and 2007-2009 crises regarding the initial conditions and geographical origin. They all occurred after a continued boom, characterized by money and credit enlargement, growing asset prices All were generated in first instance in the US, and all spread internationally to profoundly distress the world economy. In all three the financial distress at the root of the crisis was followed by a deep recession in the real economy (European Commission , 2009) . A main difference between the 1930s and the current crisis is the appearance of close cooperation amid countries in Europe as members of the European Union with a common market and a single European currency (European Commission , 2009) . The decline in world trade is greater now than in the 1930s and recovery potential is to be quicker in the current crisis than in the 1930s.

2.2.3 Economic and financial crisis in Greece Greece’s economy has been suffering a deterioration since 2008. Since quality and economy are interdependent in order to analyze the magnitudes and contributing factors

Dissertation

7


to the existing status of Quality in Greece, a transitory overview of Greece’s economic condition is deemed necessary. According to World Bank statistics, in 2015, the economy of Greece (ranking as the 15th largest economy in the 27-member European Union) was the 46th by nominal gross domestic product (GDP) and 54th by purchasing power parity (PPP) respectively. In terms of per capita income, Greece ranked 38th or 47th in the world for nominal GDP and PPP respectively. (The World Bank, 2016) The country's economy was overwhelmed during World War II, but high levels of economic evolution followed, throughout the 1950s to 1970s. Since 2000, Greece experienced high levels of GDP growth, above the Eurozone average, reaching 5.9% in 2003 and 5.5% in 2006. The succeeding Great Recession and Greek debt crisis, rushed the economy into a loud slump, with real GDP growth rates of -0.2% in 2008, -3.1% in 2009, -4.9% in 2010, -7.1% in 2011, -7.0% in 2012, -3.9% in 2013, 0.35% in 2014 and -0.21% in 2015. In 2016, the country's public debt reached 179% of nominal GDP (Inc. IBP, 2016, pp. 32-48). According to Global Competitiveness Index data, Greece ranked, 67th in 2008 2009, 83rd in 2010 – 2011, 91st in 2013 – 2014, 81st in 2015-2016 and 86th in 2016-2017 (World Economic Forum, 2017). Lately, economic activity in Greece has been unfavorably impacted by the market chaos caused by the limitations on capital control movements in the middle of 2015, which reversed any positive performance logged in Budgets up till then. Unquestionably, the undesirable effects were inferior to what originally anticipated, but the negative trend in GDP., continued in 2016. Currently, the Greek economy is still weak and the conditions back in 2015 influence the business activities of Greek corporate sector (Samitas & Polyzos, 2016). According to ICAP (ICAP Group, 2017) Greek enterprises have managed to reverse the incessant downhill trend of recent years. The turnover of the 15,771 businesses (excl. of banking, insurance and finance) decreased by 2.8% in 2015, with drop in sales in most of the sectors and specifically manufacturing (-8.2%) and mining– quarrying (-5.8%). The sectors that recorded increase in 2015 where hotels-restaurants (4.1%) and agriculture-fishing (3.1%).

Dissertation

8


2.2.4 Reasons and impact of economic crisis in Greece It is obvious that Greece has been affected more than any other European country by the financial turmoil socially, economically and politically. Greece converted to the epicenter of Europe’s debt crisis after Wall Street collapsed in 2008. With global financial markets still winding, Greece proclaimed in October 2009 that it had been devaluing its deficit figures for years, levitating alarms about the unassailability of Greek finances. Rapidly, Greece was locked out from borrowing in the financial markets. By the spring of 2010, it was swinging toward bankruptcy, which endangered to start out a new financial crisis. Then, the International Monetary Fund, the European Central Bank and the European Commission, issued the first of three international bailouts for Greece, imposing strict conditions with austerity terms, budget cuts and tax increases. Tourism and Hospitality, one of the biggest sectors in Greece confronted a shrinkage in 2009, tourism rebounded strongly in 2010 and in 2011 and showed a recovery only in 2012 (Kapiki, 2012). During a survey done by IME GSEVEE in 1007 SMEs small and micro enterprises (0-49) during February of 2017, companies are appearing to be pessimistic. 68,8% believes that economic situation has been deteriorated during the last 6 months and 58.8% believes that will continue to be worst for the next 6 months (IME GSEVEE, 2017). In comparison with the UEAPME SME Business Climate Index, that is calculated as an average of companies that have reported positive or stable business situations and expect a positive or stable development for the next period Greece is at 32,3% when EU at 77.3% (IME GSEVEE, 2017). The Greek labor force, totals 4.761 million. The unemployment rate for Greece has altered intensely since the commencement of the financial crisis. From 7.75% in 2008 and 9.6% in 2010, after peaking to almost 27.47% in 2013, today, it has receded to approximately 23.759%, while the Euro area is at 8.1% (December. 2016 data) (EUROSTAT, 2016). As we understand in the below table it is foreseen to be at 16.45% in 5 years from now.

Dissertation

9


Πίνακας 2-3 Unemployment rate by International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, April 2017 (International Monetary Fund, 2017)

During 2015 Greece was the fourth country with risk or poverty or social exclusion as reported by Eurostat reaching 35,7%, when children (0-17) at 37.8% and Adults at 39,4% (Eurostat, 2016). In the below table, we realize that EU-27 is at 23.7%. Πίνακας 2-4 At-risk-of poverty or social exclusion rate, 2014 and 2015(%) – adapted fromFigure 1. (Eurostat, 2016)

Dissertation

10


Unemployment negatively impacted health/mental health during the 2008–2013 period (Drydakis, 2015). In 2011, depression rates were 8.2%, as compared to the corresponding rate in 2008, which was 3.3%. (Economou, et al., 2013). In 30 years, the uppermost months of suicide in Greece arisen in 2012. (Branas, et al., 2015). According to the National Statistical Agency, in 2014, salaries decreased by 13.4% while the average change in Europe was an increase of 9.3% (Hellenic Statistical Authority, 2016). Migration of younger, highly educated people has risen; 222,457 Greek citizens emigrated from 2010 until early 2015 (Labrianidis & Pratsinakis, 2016). Despite all the above, Greece is consistently high in the Quality of Life rankings. In 1990, the world Human Development Index (HDI) for Greece was 0.760, in 2000, 0.801 and in 2015, it reached 0.886 ranked as no. 29. (OECD countries value: 0.888). (United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), 2016).

2.2.5 Relationship of Greek enterprises during recession and Quality management Economic turndown in Greece capsized the business environment and transformed consumers to be more demanding, in order to satisfy his needs and wants with less money. Greek SMEs are facing the internal and external push from MNCs (Multinational Corporations) that are having a competitive advantage due to mass production in low cost. Dissertation

11


Many of the greek companies were forced to either revise their investment plans or to change their strategies. A great number of SMEs were incapable to survive deteriorating consumption, the reduced purchasing power, lack of liquidity and emergency taxes. According to (Hellenic Federation of Enterprises (SEV), 2017) the Greek economy walks out of downturn much more slowly than expected, while basic weaknesses prevent growth. As for the quality segment, many companies have limited their production process, searched for cheaper raw materials and new suppliers, reduced funding for R&D, restricted marketing activities, did not upgrade to quality standardization / certification programs due to increased costs relating to lack of funding and huge drop in profits (IME GSEVEE, 2017). 2.2.6 Business strategies and economic recession In global literature, three broad ways can be identified in which businesses might adapt during difficult economic conditions: Retrenchment strategies – this seems to be the most shared approach assumed by businesses to tackle with a recession and might contain cutting operating costs and divestment of non-core assets, especially in the short-term. Investment strategies - this might contain expenditure on innovation and market diversification. Hybrid strategies – these combine retrenchment and investment. In Greece, according to (Salavou, 2013) study in the food industry in Greece, hybrid form of competitive advantage seems to be the dominant and best-performing strategic choice. Under a business environment filled with strong competitiveness and recession cycles, a company should dare to invest in Marketing, Innovation and Customer Quality, according to (Roberts, 2003). Strategic policies espoused by different enterprises in times of economic crisis are: Strategy with emphasis on marketing and differentiation, Introduction of new products and services, Pricing policy, Placement policy, Promotions and advertising policy, Research and development (R&D), Investment policies, Collaborations, Cost saving policies, Financial planning (Afthonidis & Tsiotras, 2014)

Dissertation

12


According to (Reeves & Deimler, 2009) strategies that organizations can be applied during recession are divided into behavioral strategies (Adjusting the customer offering, exploring new pricing models, entering new markets and exiting to old ones, making opportunistic moves to boost competitive advantage), social strategies ( partnering with suppliers or customers, partnering with competitors, shaping the environment), reproductive / regenerative strategies (rapid prototyping, incubation), evolutionary strategies and resilience strategies.

2.3 Quality Quality has always been recognized as a strategic tool for achieving operational efficiency and better organizational performance. (Garvin, 1987) As per the International Organization for Standardization, in ISO DIS 9000:2000, quality is the “degree to which a set of inherent characteristics fulfills requirements” (Hoyle, 2007). Quality through isn’t just connected to physical products, it is also connected to services. (American Society for Quality, 2014) in its quality glossary mentions that quality is

«A subjective term for which each person or sector has its own definition» and

therefore many of the quality gurus, such as Deming, Juran, Crosby, Feigenbaum, Ishikawa, Pirsig, Shewhart, Taguchi and others, had their own distinct explanations of ‘quality’. Deming stresses the importance of continuous improvement and defines quality as “multidimensional to produce a product and/or deliver a service that meets the customer’s expectations to ensure customer satisfaction” (Deming, 1986, p. 54) where Crosby defines quality as “conformance to requirements” (Hoyer & Hoyer, 2001, pp. 53-62) Juran defined quality as ‘fitness for use’ based on a multifaceted meaning, (1) “Quality consists of those product features which meet the needs of customers and thereby provide product satisfaction,” and (2) consists of freedom from deficiencies (Juran, 1988, pp. 2.2, 2.8). Garvin (Garvin, 1984), in conversing the progress of product quality concept, introduces a multiple definition of five perspectives: the transcendent approach; the

Dissertation

13


product based approach; the user based approach; the manufacturing-based approach and the value based approach as depicted in the graph below:

Figure 2-2 Quality perspectives (Garvin, 1988) According to Garvin (Garvin, 1987), (Garvin, 1988) product quality has eight dimensions – Performance, features, reliability, conformance, durability, serviceability, Aesthetics and Perceived Quality as depicted below:

Figure 2-3 Eight Dimensions of Quality (Garvin, 1987)

Throughout the previous twenty years, there has been a revolt in quality. Enhancements have happened not only in product quality, but also in leadership quality and project management quality. The changing views of quality appear in Table 1. (Kerzner, 2009, p. 874)

Dissertation

14

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Past

Present

Quality is the responsibility of blue-collar workers and direct labor employees working on the floor

Quality is everyone’s responsibility, including white-collar workers, the indirect labor force, the floor and the overhead staff Defects should be high-lighted and brought to the surface for corrective action Quality problems lead to cooperative solutions

Quality defects should be hidden from the customers (and possibly management) Quality problems lead to blame, faulty justification, and excuses Corrections-to-quality problems should be accomplished with minimum documentation Increased quality will increase project costs Quality is internally focused Quality will not occur without close supervision of people Quality occurs during project execution

Documentation is essential for “lessons learned” so that mistakes are not repeated Improved quality saves money and increases business Quality is customer focused People want to produce quality products Quality occurs at project initiation and must be planned for within the project

Figure 2-4 Changing views of quality (Kerzner, 2009)

From the mentioned above definitions and developments, we can conclude that quality is more than a tool, it is a vehicle to elevate competitive advantage and prosper in business environments and everyone’s responsibility. Quality is a gigantic theme, but the next step is to understand Quality in Greece and quality management systems.

2.4 Quality in Greece Quality in Greece has an extended history; the need for quality outcome, appeared primary at 50s during the industrialization process, with quality management to become a key topic during 90s, with year 1998 to be declared as Quality year. (Dervitsiotis, 1999) A lot of companies showed interest during that period in ISO 9000 especially the ones that were interested in an export passport. Many of the companies acknowledged the crucial role of quality in their survival and competitiveness (Dervitsiotis, 1999). In 1994 The University of Piraeus offered for the first time a full graduate program in TQM, and meanwhile Quality Management programs are offered in tertiary education, mostly at a continuing education or post-graduate level (Dervitsiotis, 1999).

Dissertation

15


Since 1995, a growing number of companies have got on “a journey to business excellence”, via the European Business Excellence Model, developed by the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) (Dervitsiotis, 1999). In Greek Public sector, the law N.3230/2004 foresees that different administrative units (Quality & Efficiency Sections) should be created. As for present active associations of quality professionals, there are: (a) the Hellenic Quality Forum (HQF) since 1994 and (b) the American Society for Quality (ASQ), with a Local Member Community (LMC) of over 80 prominent quality professionals, from all business sectors and management levels. ASQ LMC Greece since 2014 has started to have a significant presence in the Greek business world via various activities and events.

2.5

Quality Management Systems Nowadays, enterprises should coordinate numerous multifaceted tasks to flourish

effectively, to keep competitive in a globalized economic environment and to please their customers’ needs and prospects. Customers of today are different; their requirements and needs regarding quality of products and services are constantly increasing leading quality management to play a vital role in business environments. Implementation and verification of a quality management system prove the producer’s or manufacturer serious endeavor to proactively work on defects to meet customer requirements. Through implementation of quality management systems, enterprises can embed continual improvement cycles in their internal and external process based world. They can save costs, to maintain an able and integrated image, get rid of non-value-added processes and meet customer’s needs. The quality management system chains the alignment of activities with the aim of the organization. Greece has a National Accreditation System (ESYD), as well as a national standardization and certification body (ELOT - Hellenic Organization for Standardization). The Hellenic Organization for Standardization (ELOT) was founded in 1976, by Law 372/1976, as the National Standardization Body in Greece. Since 2013, established by the Law 4109/2013, it works as a decentralized autonomous operational unit of the National Quality Infrastructure System (NQIS / ESYP) which governs ELOT, ESYD Dissertation

16


and EIM (Hellenic Institute of Metrology). ELOT is recognized as a National Member of ISO, IEC, CEN, CENELEC, NSO & ETSI (International Organization for Standardization, 2015) (National Quality Infrastructure System (N.Q.I.S.), 2014) NQIS/ELOT has the exclusive accountability for the progress, application, promotion and distribution of Standardization in Greece. Standardization work is grasped through Sector and Technical Committees by employing a network of more than 1.000 Greek standardization specialists.

(International Organization for

Standardization, 2015) The Hellenic Accreditation System (ESYD) which was established by the Law 3066/2002 with the drive of the materialization, implementation and administration of the National Accreditation System according the Law 2231/1994 and was incorporated in 2013 at the National Quality Infrastructure System (ESYP) established by the Law 4109/2013. So far in Greece there are almost 100 accredited bodies and almost 500 accredited Laboratories. (The Hellenic Accreditation System, 2014) 2.5.1 Definitions of Quality management systems Perpetual growth in demand to guarantee the quality of products or services leads enterprises from quality control to quality assurance up to quality management. According to (American Society for Quality, 2015) “A quality management system (QMS) is a formalized system that documents processes, procedures, and responsibilities for achieving quality policies and objectives. A QMS helps coordinate and direct an organization’s activities to meet customer and regulatory requirements and improve its effectiveness and efficiency on a continuous basis.” International Standard Organization in 9000:2005 (International Organization for Standardization, 2006) refers to “management system (3.2.2) to direct and control an organization (3.3.1) regarding quality (3.1.1)”. Organizations to deal continuously with compound tasks in quality sector should transform their company’s culture; active quality management needs to be employed, in contrary with plain quality control or quality assurance practices, which only respond on defects. A strong and extensive dynamic system of an organizational structure along with a strategic management deployment, cascading its philosophy end to end to all Dissertation

17


organization is required for a successful use. A well build quality management system indicates the importance of quality to everyday business as part of our processes along with an effective and structured model with documentation and operating procedures. ISO, a word, resultant from the Greek isos, meaning "equal", issues International standards, which include rules and guidelines intended at accomplishing the best degree of the directive in a certain context. According to ISO, Standard is “a document that provides requirements, specifications, guidelines or characteristics that can be used consistently to ensure that materials, products, processes and services are fit for their purpose.” (International Organization for Standardization, 2014). As per (Varoufakis, 1999, pp. 54-61) study the Elefsis stele of the 4th century is the oldest European Standard. Certification to management system standards is not a requirement by ISO. Companies can advantage from employing these standards without being certified to them. To assist the auditing related to these standards, ISO has released ISO 19011:2011 provisioning specific guidance on internal and external management system audits. According to ISO, all quality management standards are based on seven quality management principles (QMPs) (International Organization for Standardisation, 2015): QMP 1 – Customer Focus QMP 2 – Leadership QMP 3 – Engagement of people QMP 4 – Process approach QMP 5 – Improvement QMP 6 – Evidence-based decision making QMP 7 – Relationship management The ISO during 2015 issued a total of 1,519,952 certificates globally showing an overall increase of 3 %. as per below summary with top 5 countries being China, Italy, Germany, Japan and the United Kingdom. (International Organization for Standardization, 2016):

Dissertation

18

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Πίνακας 2-5 ISO Certificates (International Organization for Standardization, 2016):

Standard ISO 9001 ISO 14001 ISO 50001 ISO 27001 ISO 22000 ISO / TS 16949 ISO 13485 ISO 22301 ISO 22000-1 TOTAL

Number of Number of Certificates in certificates Change 2015 in 2014 Change in % 1033936 1036321 -2385 -0.20% 319324 296736 22588 8.00% 11985 6765 5220 77.00% 27536 23005 4531 20.00% 32061 27690 4371 16.00% 62944 26255 3133 2778 1519952

57950 26280 1757 1476504

4994 -25 1376 2778 43448

9.00% -0.10% 78.00% 3.00%

The graphs below describe the ISO certifications in Greece, as reported by ISO (International Organization for Standardization, 2015)

Figure 2-5 ISO Certifications Greece 1993 – 2015 (International Organization for Standardization, 2015)

During the first period (2008-2012) of economic recession in Greece, we see an overall decrease in the number of Certifications in the Greek area, mainly due to big drop of ISO 9001 certification. 2013 had an overall increase of 36% due to Partnership Agreement (PA) 2014-2020 financing where during the second period (2013 – 2015) we see a decline again by 24% which regained in 2015 by 15%.

In 2015 all

certifications show an ongoing trend, it seems that there is a recovery, approaching the numbers of 2008. Dissertation

19


Figure 2-6 ISO Certifications of Greece 2008- 2015 (International Organization for Standardization, 2015)

The below graph describes the industrial sectors of Certifications in Greece during 2015 for 6 out of the most common standards (International Organization for Standardization, 2016): Πίνακας 2-6 ISO Certifications of Greece per sectors 2015 (International Organization for Standardization, 2015)

Dissertation

20


Wholesale and retail trade is the major sector with 19%, followed by other services, education, food products, beverage and tobacco, basic metal and fabricated metal products as shown below: Πίνακας 2-7 % of ISO Certifications of Greece 2015 (International Organization for Standardization, 2015)

2.5.2 Motives for implementation of QMS and challenges Various firms are deciding to implement or certified with QMS for different reasons. According to (Dick, 2000) “The principal motivation for pursuing quality certificate was the ability of the certificate to open customers’ doors that were previously closed, or would close, if quality certificate were not achieved. The companies, see QMS certification as a route on increasing their marketing or their market share. (Fotopoulos & Psomas, 2009) believe that Greek companies acknowledge that QMS found a noteworthy factor that moves their viable advantage and their sustainability in the market. Some organizations see the initiative as a vehicle to improve internally processes, products and services and enhance the organizational effectiveness. Others are driven by the customers or supplier’s requirements to conform with standards and regulation and increase the satisfaction. (Gotzamani & Tsiotras, 2002) (Terziovski, et al., 2003)

Dissertation

21


Improving internal culture and effectiveness is a key driver since QMS promote that organization’s goals and priorities are clearly recognized, communicated, and associated with operational activities. (Gotzamani & Tsiotras, 2002) QMS also aids to outline document systems and document requirements so activities and processes are evidently logged and accessible. (Gotzamani & Tsiotras, 2002) Disadvantages that have being reported regarding the implementation of QMS from the literature are in most of the cases cost and time. Time is required for the correct planning, documenting and maintaining the quality. The commitment of resources and allocation of time can embody a significant cost. (Tsiotras & Gotzamani, 1996) (Lipovatz, et al., 1999) 2.5.3 ISO 9001 – Quality Management Systems ISO 9001 belongs to the family of ISO 9000 series, which addresses various aspects of quality management. The ISO 9001 was first published in 1987; it is a standard that reflects the code of the standard for the quality management systems. It has been reviewed lately in 2015 to meet the changing needs of the customers and align with the latest developments in business environments. Using ISO 9001:2015 assistances guarantee that customers get reliable, upright quality products and services, which sequentially carries many business benefits. (International Organization for Standardization, 2012) (International Organization for Standardization, 2016) The ISO 9001:2015 standard is designed in a way to be used by any size and type of companies and it is fully compatible with other systems such as ISO 14001 and ISO 22000 among others. Currently, there are over one million companies and organizations in over 170 countries certified to ISO 9001. (International Organization for Standardization, 2012) ISO 9001:2015 is based on the seven quality management principles (QMPs), fundamentals of any quality-oriented organization as presented in the below figure (International Organization for Standardisation, 2015).

Dissertation

22


Figure 2-7 Quality Management Principles of ISO 9001:2015 (Prince Sultan Aviation Academy, 2016)

QMP 1 – Customer focus: Business environments should understand the customer current and future needs and strive to exceed customer expectations. Customers are the bloodstream of the firms and businesses should invest in creating value to attract and retain the confidence of them. Actions that needed to be taken by organizations are to recognize and understand customers through effective communication, link the organizations objectives to customers wants, measure and monitor satisfaction and actively manage relationship with customers. (International Organization for Standardisation, 2015) QMP 2 – Leadership: leaders should create unity to direct the organizations, to motivate staff and engage them to succeed the quality objectives. They should better coordinate and create a work environment and a culture that supports better coordination,

communication,

development

and

improvement.

(International

Organization for Standardisation, 2015) QMP 3 – Engagement of people: Involvement of people infers that all employees are vital and their full involvement improves productivity and benefits to the organization. Acknowledgement, empowerment and development of competences facilitate the engagement of people. Organizations should promote internal end to end collaboration, solid communication, knowledge sharing and self-evaluation. (International Organization for Standardisation, 2015) QMP 4 – Process approach: This principle focuses systemic thinking, on how organization deals operations holistically regardless of the operations system Dissertation

23


complexity. Understand and manage the key processes and their interconnections, establish authority, responsibility and accountability, manage risks and work with data are the vital keys to success. (International Organization for Standardisation, 2015) QMP 5 – Improvement: Improvement will assist in the maintenance of current levels of quality, proactive reaction as well as creation of new opportunities. Root cause investigation, followed by prevention and corrective actions, education and training to all levels and enhancement of drive for innovation will assist into this direction. (International Organization for Standardisation, 2015) The term continual is used in ISO 9001 standard and not continuous. It is defined at as «Recurring activity to enhance performance» (3.3.2). Τhe note to the term clarifies that the process of finding openings for improvement is a continual process via the use of audit process and reviews and finally leads to corrective action or preventive action (International Organization for Standardization, 2014). To author’s understanding the distinction among continuous and continual terms in this respect reflects to the fact that ‘continuous’ represents a flow without interruptions whereas ‘continual’ represents repeated initiatives on regular and frequent basis. QMP 6 – Evidence-based decision making: Data based management based on evidence, on analysis and evaluation of data balanced with experience and intuition, will improve the assessment of process performance and eventually the operational effectiveness and efficiency (International Organization for Standardisation, 2015). QMP 7 – Relationship management: maintain healthy relationships with external and internal stakeholders and partners to elevate common understanding of common goals and values (International Organization for Standardisation, 2015). The new version of ISO 9001:2015 is adopting a broader risk management approach, focusing more on leadership rather than the simply management of QMPs, enhanced consideration of organizational context and the needs and expectations of interested parties as well as the improved use of documented information. The heart of ISO 9001 is the four step Deming Cycle, plan-do-check-act (PDCA): identify an opportunity and plan, implement the scale of a pilot phase, check the results and readjust if necessary and implement of full scale and continuously assess. The cycle should be never ending, since enterprise should eventually strive for continuous improvement (International Organization for Standardization, 2016). Dissertation

24


ISO 9001:2015 depicts its systemic structure as per below graph:

Figure 2-8 Representation of the structure of ISO 9001 International Standard in the PDCA cycle. (International Organization for Standardization, 2016, p. 10)

Organizations are expected to gain core benefits by implementing ISO 9001 such as: Centering their internal processes according the voice of the customer to increase satisfaction. Work efficiently and promote communication in a way that everyone understands the goals and policies, so that efficiency is being improved. Penetrate new markets that may require ISO 9001 as a prerequisite. Comply with regulatory requirements and be proactive with risks that may arise promptly. Clarify your objectives and identify new opportunities by evaluating the overall situation of your organization. (International Organization, 2015) In Greece ISO 9001 is one of the most popular standard with more than 6000 certifications. According to (Ismyrlis & Moschidis, 2015) study in Greek companies with ISO 9001 certification, the most important benefits appear to be: customer satisfaction, greatest opportunity for export, effective promotional and/or marketing tool, and improvement of company image. The critical success factors during implementation in Greek companies as per (Ismyrlis, et al., 2015) are management commitment, education, and communication. (Psomas, et al., 2010) study findings in Greek SMEs were internal motivation of company; attributes of company; employee attributes; requirements of the quality system; and attributes of the external environment.

Dissertation

25


2.5.4 ISO 14001:2015 Environmental management systems Our planet is facing ecological challenges more than never. Customer’s concerns for environmental protection and responsibility is increasing. ISO 14001 environmental management system (EMS) has been formed covering all environmental challenges, to support enterprises in reducing the environmental impact and its business effect. ISO 14001, is a nonprescriptive standard, detailing what should be done, but not how to do it. Is applicable to all kind of companies and it supports organizations recognize and control their environmental issues holistically. Current standard is also based developed around Deming’s PDCA cycle and the need for continual improvement. (International Organization for Standardization, 2015) The drive of the ISO 14001 management system standard is to stipulate overall guidelines that, when applied, should offer realistic guarantee that the outputs from the system will have slight harmful environmental impact and better-quality environmental performance. (International Organization for Standardization, 2015) In Greece, pursuant to Article 24.1 of the Constitution, «the protection of the natural and cultural environment constitutes a duty of the State and a right of every person». (Sioutis, 2016) ISO 14001 as well as EMAS, EU Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS), should be applied by all medium and high nuisance manufacturing companies within 5 years of initiation as per law 3325/2005 - FEK 68/Α/ 11.3.2005 (Hellenic Institute for Occupational Health and Safety, 2006). ISO 14001 was first published in 1996, and as per the ISO survey (International Organization for Standardization, 2015), more than 300,000 organizations in 171 countries have certified to ISO 14001. Europe holds more than 115,000 certifications, whereas Greece in 2015 had 1115 certifications, showing a continuous increase despite the economic recession. The new revision published on 2015, is fully integrated and aligned with ISO 9001:2015 and includes new elements such as promoting lifecycle thinking, proactive sustainable resource use and climate change mitigation. (International Organization for Standardization, 2016) Dissertation

26


As per (Psomas, et al., 2011) in Greece ISO 14001 is being, it is implemented by both small-medium and large Greek enterprises in contrary with ISO 9001 and ISO 22000. As per (Lagodimos, et al., 2006) analysis, the larger organizations in most sectors proved to have the most ISO 14001 implementations in Greek area and that certification decisions strongly depend on activity-related factors. By implementing ISO 14001, enterprises guarantee that their environmental management system (EMS) matches global trade explicit environmental standards and meets legal obligations. Organizations and companies find that using the ISO 14001 benefits them with identifying cost savings on resource, waste and energy management and improve resource efficiency. In addition, they gain competitive advantage in improving operational efficiency of supply chain and quantifying, monitoring and governing the environmental impact. Furthermore, they progress their corporate image and credibility and potentially decrease public liability insurance costs. (International Organization for Standardisation, 2015) 2.5.5 ISO 13485:2016 Medical Devices Quality, safety and care are inflexible in the medical devices industry. Regulatory requirements are gradually rigorous during each stage of a product’s life cycle, as well as service and delivery. Increasingly, organizations in the industry are anticipated to prove their quality management processes and safeguard best practice in all they do. ISO 13485 is a standard destined to be used by organizations that design, product, install and service medical devices. (Eduardo Gadotti Martins, 2015) The first ISO 13485 was published in 1996 and revised in 2003. The new version of ISO 13485:2016, Medical devices – Quality management systems – Requirements for regulatory purposes, that published in March 2016 is a worldwide agreed standard that describes the requirements regarding medical devices industry. It incorporates improvements in alignment with regulatory requirements, focuses on risk management as well as on post-market surveillance (International Organization for Standardization, 2016).

Dissertation

27


Although ISO 13485 is a separate standard, it is analogous in scope and purpose to ISO 9001. It covers supplementary requirements related to organizations involved in the life cycle of medical devices, whereas further elements of ISO 9001 have been removed that are not applicable to regulatory requirements. Like all ISO management system standards, it is intended to be combined into an organization’s present management systems. The benefits of ISO 13485 certification embrace regulatory compliance and risk management effectiveness. Certification benefits conformity to national or international regulatory conditions. Certification likewise affirms to customers, suppliers and other stakeholders that the organization controls its operations. Furthermore, certification offers assurance of quality risk management, best practice validation and good manufacturing practices in the medical device supply chain thru the medical device product life cycle. (International Organization for Standardization, 2016)

2.5.6 ISO 27001:2013 Information security management systems Effective businesses appreciate the value of up-to-date, authentic information, valuable communications and privacy. Information security is regarding exploring the threats of our interrelated world as well as its risk management activities in order to ensure business continuity and integrity, diminish corporate damage and take full advantage of business opportunities. Information Security Management System (ISMS) is a methodical approach to handling sensitive company information so that it continues secure. It comprises of people, processes and IT systems by employing a risk management process. (International Organization for Standardization, 2017) ISO 27001:2013, Information Technology-Security Techniques-Information security management systems-Requirements standard, part of the ISO/IEC 27000 group of Standards, published in October 2015 by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). (The ISO 27000 Directory, 2017) It is an information security management system (ISMS) that “…. provides the requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining and continually improving Dissertation

28


an information security management system within the context of the organization. ” (International Organization for Standardization, 2013) Most of the modern business environments have several information security controls in place. Though, quite a lot of technical and process controls tend to be unconnected to each other, having been applied as point resolutions to solve certain aspects of IT or data security but not to an end to end security program framework. ISO/IEC 27001 compliance fortifies an organization's security program since it requires that management continuously sponsors and approves the ISMS program and policies. Additionally, it scrutinizes security risks taking into consideration threats, vulnerabilities and impacts, it involves consistent and updated end to end information security controls in order to attack risks and continuously meet organization’s information security needs. (Pelnekar, 2011) Accredited certification to ISO/IEC 27001 increases credibility and proves to current and future customers that an organization has a well-defined and established effective information security processes in order to mitigate threats. It allows organizations to protect valuable data and a possible data breach and proves that as an organization you are considering cyber security threats with seriousness. (Watkins, 2013, pp. 2-6) ISO/IEC 27001 improves company culture and builds trust, since it adopts a holistic approach to organization, including people, processes and technology and advances structure as well as focus. (Gillies, 2011, pp. 367-376) While in Greece is not a legal requirement, it helps organizations to expand into global markets, creating a marketing differentiation and enhancing business reputation. 2.5.7 IFS, BRC, ISO 22000: 2005 /HACCP Certification of food safety management systems Food safety has always been one of the most significant items in relation to human health and today it is becoming more important and non- negotiable than never. It involves the full production chain since numerous hazards can have penetrated them by contaminating them and making them unsafe. World Health Organization has recognized consumers with right to health. According to this, only products and services that do not endanger the health and safety

Dissertation

29


of the consumer are to be marketed. Food safety can be achieved by identifying and controlling risks throughout the production process in order to achieve their elimination or minimize the likelihood of their occurrence in recent decades with the development of the food industry (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2008). In 2002, the European Parliament and the Council Approved Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 establishing the overall principles and requirements of food and feed law (General Food Law Regulation). European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) was founded the same year after various food crises in the late 1990s and is responsible for keeping food safe (European Communities, 2002). ELGO (previous AGROCERT) is the Greek National Authority for the evaluation, approval and supervision of private Certification bodies, accredited by the National Accreditation System, regarding the Integrated Management System for agricultural production, pork, bovine, poultry farming and maricultural, in compliance with AGRO standards (ELGO - DIMITRA, 2016) EFET is a Greek public entity administered by the Ministry of Reconstruction of Production, Environment & Energy destined to conduct systematic inspection in food businesses and sets quality standards to protect public health. Only in 2016 EFET has conducted 137 recalls of food related products (EFET, 2015). A series of quality management systems has been issued to provide rules and guidelines for every process in food chain and systematically manage the quality and safety from the farm to the consumer’s plate. The adoption of these standards ensures a high level of consumer health and each stakeholder contributes decisively and responsibly to the production of safe foods that meet the requirements of the consumers and the legislation while aiming at the continuous improvement of the food safety and quality. The International Featured Standard (IFS) provides a series of food-related standards, like IFS Food, IFS Global Markets food and IFS Logistics since 2003 in accordance with the GFSI guidelines. The current version of IFS Food version 6 and is used to audit food manufacturers concerning food safety and excellence of processes and products. (IFS Management GmbH, 2016) British Retail Consortium (BRC) Global Standard for Food Safety was first published in 1998. It is another global standard current at it 7th issue, settled by food Dissertation

30


industry specialists from retailers, manufacturers and food service establishments to safeguard it is a comprehensive and thorough, thus easy to comprehend. It offers a context to accomplish product safety, veracity, validity and excellence, in the food industry (BRC Global Standards, 2017). Food management systems like IFS and BRC are more detailed and specialized than ISO 22000 and are being employed by export trading organizations. The Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) is a system globally used to properly recognize, assess, and control hazards that are important to food safety (Arvanitoyannis, 2009, pp. 3-6). ISO 22000 is an international standard issued by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), proposed to be used for any type of organizations inside the food chain. It incorporates all the prerequisites for a food system management system (FSMS) and integrates all the foundations of Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) as well as the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points (HACCP) (Spyridon Mamalis, et al., 2009). The standard is based on the philosophy of continual improvement and aims to practically reduce and eliminate the food safety risks. It assists organizations to control the safety hazards, through effective communication and system operational process based management. In addition, it provides effective and robust processes regarding food safety practices and procedures and ensures that adequate controls are being conducted at all stages of chain in order to prevent hazards (Evangelos L. Psomas & Dimitrios P. Kafetzopoulos, 2015, pp. 134-139). ISO 22000:2005 with its systematic approach goes beyond HACCP program and could be fully integrated into a quality management system ISO 9001 (International Organization for Standardization, 2012). The implementation of ISO 22000 increases the reliability, confidence and transparency of your internal food management system so that customers and suppliers are sure about the products produced. This way, brand image is created and market position is strengthened. Moreover, it increases the efficiency of internal processes and created internal confidence, since the organization through the system plans, monitors, audits, measures and controls in a timely manner and in a proper way (Bilalis, et al., 2009, p. 237–242) (Arvanitoyannis, 2009, pp. 23-24). Dissertation

31


2.5.8 OHSAS 18001:2007 & ISO / DIS 45001 – Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S) Management System According to International Labor Organization (ILO) only in 2013, there were about 2.34 million of deaths because of work activities (International Organization for Standardization, 2015). According to (European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, 2017) in Greece, economic recession has severely impacted the health and safety: organizations give priority to production and minimization of costs, decreasing the quality level of health and safety of employees, with stress, workload and insecurity. Thorough occupational health and safety procedures are vital for workforce, but they are also ever more significant for customers and suppliers. Several organizations adopt an Occupational Health and Safety Management System as a central fragment of their risk management strategy to tackle fluctuating legislation and guard their workforce. OHSAS 18001: 2007 is the most recognized standard worldwide, that enables the organizations to handle effectively operational health and safety management. It is a framework for Occupational Health and Safety, part of OHSAS 1800 series. OHSAS 18001 was first formulated in 1999 based on British Standard 8800 of 1996, in order to create a single unified approach (Guoyou Qi, 2013, pp. 1983-2005). OHSAS 18001 tackles the Hazard identification under the umbrella of risk assessment and the risk control management, establishes the OHS program with accountabilities and authorities in accordance with legal and other requirements. Ensures that there is operational control with competence and awareness and invests in continuous communication and emergency preparedness as well as performance measuring and improvement. Occupational Health and Safety Management systems certification to OHSAS 18001 is a robust mark of your organization’s assurance to end to end value chain health and safety (SGS Group, 2016). ISO is currently developing a new standard, ISO/DIS 45001 – Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S) Management System which is planned to substitute the widely-implemented BS OHSAS 18001 by February of 2018. It is destined for all types of organization regardless its size or nature and it will be compatible with other health

Dissertation

32


and safety programs. It will deliver the prerequisites for employing a management system and framework that diminishes the risk of work-related injury and ill health to employees and it will be well-suited with ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 (GasiorowskiDenis, 2017). The key benefits of OHSAS 18001:2007 implementation is the systematic evaluation of risk, identification of hazards, minimization of risks throughout business environment. It creates organizational culture that engages and motivates staff and promotes best working conditions across the company. Reduces the likelihood of fines and demonstrates corporate responsibility towards customers, suppliers and employees. Improves the reputation and trust and demonstrates social responsibility. In addition, it improves the overall process effectiveness and performance (BSI Group, 2016).

2.6 Quality Improvement Programs All business establishments are anxious on how they will last and flourish in the future; in order to hold a leading position in the current competitive world, companies are setting the long-term path through business strategies and planning the steps needed in order to ensure future success. These strategies are including five performance objectives: Cost, quality, speed, dependability and flexibility. (Slack, et al., 2010, pp. 39-42). The significant competitive business strategies contain mutually achieving lower cost and value added towards customer by differentiation. A strategy that can be employed in order to achieve competitive performance is quality improvement. Quality and quality improvement are terms that appear regularly in business discussions as revenue or profit. Quality improvement differentiates products and services and at the same time thrives lower costs though waste elimination and improved productivity, flexibility and process innovation. It is observed as an organization-wide process of focused and continuous incremental innovation. (Porter, 1980, pp. 12-36) (Hayes , et al., 2004, pp. 21-24) Academics have defined Quality Improvement in several ways. Some differentiate Quality Improvement from innovation; when others believe that essentials of business and technology revolution are entrenched in Quality Improvement. Quality Dissertation

33


improvement covers an immense range of tools, techniques and methodologies of which continuous improvement is the central core. Every organization is using different methodologies for Quality Improvement initiatives and from literature, these initiatives have been cited with different names. ASQ speaks for the most widely adopted continuous improvement practices, which are TQM (Total Quality Management), Lean, Six Sigma or combination of both (American Society for Quality, 2016). (Bendell, 2005) speaks for business process improvement methodologies, (Staw & Epstein, 2000) for management techniques, (Kedar, et al., 2008) for Organizational Performance Improvement Techniques, whereas (Miller & Hartwick, 2002) called them management fads and fashion trends. New programs are introduced during economic recessions or points of crisis aiming to assist the organizations in order to reshuffle internally and improve the quality of products and services through business performance measurements and improved customer relations. Irrespective of the methodology of the quality improvement programs, every organization should select strategically the different approach that matches with the long-term vision and mission of the company. James Broadstone, Operations Director in Service Adhesives Limited, points out the key to success after having tried TQM, Lean and Six Sigma with no success: “I have come to believe that we have fallen behind in our thinking. A new kind of organizational culture is needed for these challenging times and we must respond by learning from the best practice that we can find. We also must be seen by our customers as forward thinking.” (Slack, et al., 2010, p. 257) Culture seems to be the most critical success factor (CSF) among others in the Quality Improvement literature. It is seen as prompting the success of changes required for deployments in the organizations (Zu, et al., 2010) (Dahlgaard & Dahlgaard‐Park, 2006) (Rad, 2006). This study will concentrate on the six major continuous improvement frameworks programs such as Total Quality Management (TQM), Business Process Reengineering (BPR), Lean, Kaizen, Six Sigma and European Foundation Quality Management (EFQM).

Dissertation

34


2.6.1 Motives for implementation of QI programs and challenges Enterprises are aiming to gain market share in global environment and the competition is so aggressive. Quality, customer satisfaction and profitability are the top items in day to day agenda. (Salah, et al., 2010), (Chiarini, 2011) and (Dahlgaard & Dahlgaard‐Park, 2006) state that the motives for implementation are the optimization of resources and increase of flexibility, better cost management, the increase of motivation and commitment of people, the higher productivity and profitability, the optimization of communication and the culture transformation, the enhanced market image, the improved focus on customer satisfaction. The Critical success factors of QI initiatives according to (Siha & Saad, 2008) are the best practices shared, knowledge sharing and communication, the involvement and commitment of top management, and the effective use of information technology. Reasons for failure are the absence of a strategic plan for change, lack of leadership and customer focus, lack of empowerment and employee trust, lack of time and view of the quality program as a quick fix, poor communication and strive for short term financial results (Salegna & Fazel, 2000) (Sălăgean, et al., 2014) (Ricondo & Viles, 2005) .

2.6.2 TQM – Total Quality Management In the international business market enlarged levels of competition have occasioned in quality fetching of cumulative importance to organizations and therefore Total Quality Management (TQM) has converted a vital management issue. A significant number of enterprises are applying TQM and the methodology is being analytically exposed in literature. Total Quality Management (TQM) was first presented at 1985 by the Naval Air Systems Command in order to describe the Japanese way of quality management. This methodology includes a series of elements from behavioral sciences, analysis of quantitative and non-quantitative data, economics theories, and process analysis. (Westcott, 2006, pp. 303-307).

Dissertation

35


According to (Powell, 1995) TQM origins go back in 1949, whereas Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers formed a committee devoted to improving productivity and recover their post-life quality, while in the USA flourished around 80s. The methodology was imported to Japan at the 1950s through Edwards Deming and Joseph Juran, and accepted widely. where their method was initially named Total Quality Control (TQC). Armand Feigenbaum’ s book Total Quality Control in 1961, was a forerunner of TQM. (Westcott, 2006, pp. 303-307). In the USA, the MBNQA (American Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award) that was initiated by the US-American Congress in 1988 or the Deming Prize specified principles and processes the encompass TQM. (Westcott, 2006, pp. 303-307) (Tummala & Tang, 1996) In Europe, in 1992 the European Quality Award (EQA) was established by the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) targeting at the broadcasting of the TQM idea and its realization. (Fotopoulos & Psomas, 2008) (Gómez Gómez, et al., 2015) (Anastasiadou & Zirinoglou, 2015, pp. 411-431). TQM is considered as a management system, a broad and systemic approach to managing organizational quality. The main three components are values, techniques and tools as depicted below. (Hellsten & Klefsjö, 2000) (Andersson, et al., 2006)

Figure 2-9 TQM as a Management System Consisting of Values, Methodologies and Tools – adapted from Figure 3 (Hellsten & Klefsjö, 2000, p. 241)

TQM is the management system that seeks to maximize the value of the product or service provided, as perceived by the eyes of the customer and aims to satisfy the needs of the consumer, the supplier and the employee. (Tsiotras & Gotzamani, 1996)

Dissertation

36


(Tummala & Tang, 1996) argue that the TQM is a strategic framework for linking productivity, operational objectives and competitiveness to quality improvement efforts in order to strengthen human, material and informational resources across the enterprise, in order to build a continuous improvement which eventually will lead to customer satisfaction. TQM has also received some criticism for implementation long times, internal focus and lack of concrete guidelines (Mosadeghrad, 2014) (Harari, 1997). (Pyzdek, 2003) (Pyzdek, 2001) reported the absence of a clear roadmap and way to prove accomplishment of quality goals, factors that discouraging many companies from implementing TQM. A lot of academics have tried to investigate and analyze the elements and magnitudes of TQM such as (Martinez-Lorente, et al., 2010) and (Flynn, et al., 1994) . The primary aspects of TQM are (Westcott, 2006, pp. 303-307) :

Figure 2-10 The elements of TQM (Westcott, 2006)

1. Customer-focused: The customer is the ultimate judge company’s initiatives towards quality, he is the one that determines the levels of quality. 2. Total employee involvement: continuous improvement culture through commitment, empowerment and proper environment from management. 3. Process-centered: process thinking approach with continuous monitoring.

Dissertation

37


4. Integrated system: interconnection of horizontal processes with business performance monitoring and communication. According to (Westcott, 2006) this can be modeled after BNQP criteria or ISO 9000 standards. 5. Strategic and systematic approach: strategic planning towards achievement of organization’s goals derived from mission and vision. 6. Continual improvement: The thrust of the TQM is continuous improvement, involving all employees in a customer focused organization. 7. Fact-based decision making: Speaking with data, based on data collection and analysis which will improve predictions and decision making. 8. Communications: effective communications support motivation and morale. (Westcott, 2006, pp. 291-292) (Deming, 1986, pp. 23-24) presented 14 key principles for any organization to effectively implement Total Quality Management as shown below: DEMING’S 14 POINTS 1. Create constancy of purpose

8. Drive out fear

2. Adopt the new philosophy and take on leadership for change. 3. Cease dependence on inspection to 9. achieve quality.

Break

down

barriers

between

departments

4. minimize total cost by improving 10. Eliminate slogans. Fix the system quality of supplies 5. Improve constantly quality and 11.

Eliminate

quotas.

Substitute

productivity to decrease costs.

leadershio

6. Institute training on the job.

13. Institute a vigorous program of education and self-improvement.

7. The aim of supervision should be to 14. The transformation is everybody's help people and machines and gadgets to job. do a better job.

Figure 2-11 Deming's 14 Key principles (Deming, 1986, pp. 23-24)

Many researchers believe that the TQM is the predecessor of ISO 9001 and that the eight elements are common in a way when it comes to quality practices. (Tummala & Tang, 1996), (Lakhal, 2014). An empirical study of (Gotzamani & Tsiotras, 2001) in Greece showed that application of ISO9000 can offer a good step on the way to TQM.

Dissertation

38


Other researchers believe that the benefits of the two systems are not interrelated (Martínez‐Lorente & Martínez‐Costa, 2004) when others believe that there are clear differences among them, such as the concept of continuous improvement, that is proactive in TQM when retroactive in ISO, the employee participation or the customer focus principles that seem to play a more vital role in TQM than in ISO (Tummala & Tang, 1996), (Lee, et al., 1999) , (Zhu, 1999). While the descriptions of TQM, Six Sigma and lean differ, the purpose remains the same, improve customer satisfaction and financial results through enhancements. They also have a lot of similarities when it comes to origin, methodologies, tools and effects. Still, there are some differences when it comes to main theory and approach (Andersson, et al., 2006) A lot of organizations are deciding to implement a combination of the methods as complementary and synergistic; applying lean and Six Sigma as roadmaps in order to reinforce the values of TQM inside the organization.

Figure 2-12 Similarities and differences between TQM, Six Sigma and lean (Andersson, et al., 2006)

In Greece, according to (Dervitsiotis, 1999) there seem to be only islands of quality in greek organizations. TQM seems to be not fully integrated by SMEs according to a study in hotel Industry by (Bouranta, et al., 2017) and (Lazari & Kanellopoulos, 2007) due to lack of education or because they believe it unnecessary. Same seems to apply in Greek banking service as per (Melidonioti & Gotzamani, 2007) and structural construction sector (Kampouridis, et al., 2015) since TQM techniques and methods are not used properly and to the suitable degree. Furthermore, it appears from the study that TQM tools were not sufficient to absorb the adverse influence of the Greek economic recession.

Dissertation

39


2.6.3 BPR – Business process Reengineering In the era of global competition and radical change, reengineering is a type of innovative reaction to socioeconomic changes. It entails the reprojection the organization’s processes into three directions: by regrouping the activities in intelligible processes, by processes oriented reshuffle and by organization redesign (Davenport, 1993, pp. 27-36). According to (Kale, 2016, pp. 247-252) , Michael Hammer back in 1990 presented Business Process Reengineering (BPR) as a radical restructure and redefinition of business processes. BPR has its roots in IT but got great timbre in other sectors too both in Europe and in the USA (Hammer & Champy, 1993). (Hammer & Champy, 1993) classify three types of companies that commence re-engineering: those that are in deep trouble, those that may not be in trouble but have predicted some trouble coming, and those that are in “top condition” and determined to uphold their advantage and improve. BPR is being characterized by radical improvement, clear distinction and prioritization of processes, support from IT, alignment of processes among customer and suppliers, focus on the customer and working in groups (Chountalas, 2010). (Motwani, et al., 1998) presented a six phases theoretical framework plan for a successful BPR project. The six stages of the model contain understanding, initiating, planning, programming, transforming, implementing, and evaluating as shown at the figure below

Dissertation

40


Figure 2-13 Practical framework on BPR- adapted from Figure 2 (Motwani, et al., 1998, p. 969)

Even though BPR was presented as a successor of TQM by its common focus to the customer and the collaborating teams, there was a lot of criticism regarding its approach. By demarcating from continuous improvement processes into small improvement steps as in KAIZEN they, though, do not capture the full exigencies of an integrative management. (Hammer & Champy, 1993). The main purpose of BPR differentiates from TQM and ISO in respect to its approach on top down dramatic improvements through redesigned or new processes and not to current processes (Kale, 2016, pp. 247-252). According to (Biazzo, 1998) , BPR is just a project of change management and not a continuous process mechanism of integrative management as TQM.

2.6.4 LEAN

Dissertation

41


Lean manufacturing has spread worldwide from a set of tools and techniques to become a thinking way, a management philosophy promoting quality through its systematic approach of waste elimination. Lean manufacturing was first introduced through Japanese Toyota Production System (Ohno, 1988) and evolved to be applicable to all business sectors. Lean thinking attacks “Muda” – waste in Japanese and provides a way to specify value and a way to do more with less while matching at the same time customer’s needs (Womack & Jones, 2003, pp. 15-18). (Womack & Jones, 2003, pp. 15-90) identify five key principles of the lean organization: the removal of Muda; the tracking of the value stream; the accomplishment of flow through the process; pacing by a pull system; and the incessant hunt of perfection. To attain these principles, a combination of tools and methods from Toyota Production System as presented below are being used along with a systematic search of value via the abolition of waste in all features of the organizations processes and eventually the creation of a Value Stream Map (VSM).

Figure 2-14 Toyota Production System (Lean Enterprise Institute, 2016)

The seven deadly wastes according to (Womack & Jones, 2003, pp. 15-90) are overproduction, waiting, conveyance, motion, overprocessing, inventory and defects. Enterprises are implementing lean manufacturing to improve their productivity and flexibility and at the same time employ a better utilization of equipment and space. (Bendell, 2006). Both LM (Lean Manufacturing) and the QMS (Quality Management

Dissertation

42


Systems) as well as TQM principles and methods are aiming towards improving effectiveness and efficiency (Anvari, 2011) . In Boeing Production System, Lean Manufacturing and QMS are inseparably linked. Steve Westby, vice president of Manufacturing for Airplane Programs, points that “You can't build without quality and you can't ensure quality without Lean initiatives. They're interdependent." (The Boeing Company, 2003)

Figure 2-15 The Boeing Production System and the Boeing Quality Management System (The Boeing Company, 2003)

According to (Chiarini, 2011) many of the manufacturing enterprises are using both methods. His is introducing in his work a guide for how implement lean thinking into a QMS system. (Micklewright, 2010, pp. 19-41) refer to Lean and ISO 9001 as complementary forces and proposes an integration of lean practices and QMS. (Marques, et al., 2016) introduces an integrated outline of ISO 9001:2015 and combination of both Lean and Six Sigma. (Hines, et al., 2014) supports that Lean Thinking from a strategic point of view can be intergrated with all other approaches, as presesented in the below mentioned figure.

Dissertation

43


Figure 2-16 Lean – a framework adapted from Figure 2. (Hines, et al., 2014, p. 1007)

Lean in Greek Manufacturing sector is being reviewed in previous studies, where main reasons for implementation failures are the lack of training as well as the absence of leadership and commitment (Salonitis & Tsinopoulos, 2016). Lean implementation success in Service Industry in Greek enterprises is being also associated with organizational factors such as culture, previous policies and procedures (Vouzas, et al., 2013). Corporations, in a world of shrinking resources and increased competition are giving more attention to lean transformation initiatives during the financial crisis, as per a survey led by the Lean Enterprise Institute (LEI). (Lean Enterprise Institute, Inc., 2009). This may be done though for the wrong reasons, as stressed by the John Shook, Lean Management expert in 2009 Lean Transformation Summit conference. Shook believes the worldwide financial crisis will “separate the lean wheat from the chaff”. The authentic lean enterprises wont neglect continuous improvement efforts, but they will intensify their efforts. (Lean Enterprise Institute, Inc., 2009) James Womack, in his article “Lean Thinking was forged in similar Economic Times”, points out that systematic science work and ongoing commitment is the key to exit crisis (Womack, 2009). During economic downturns, both operational and strategic waste identification and elimination should be performed for above mentioned wastes but also unprofitable products, business units, affiliates, over-diversification, over-expansion and excess productions should also be examined. Change of culture should not be just for the sake of crisis, but should be transformed to a permanent culture and way of living. A workable waste-conscious culture aids to crisis-proof enterprises against the influence of future economic recessions. Dissertation

44


2.6.5 KAIZEN Organizations in Greece are affected by globalization and global competition. In order to be competitive in the international market and improve their competitiveness they apply Kaizen program in their organizations as an extension of Lean Management or separately. Successful TQM could be attained when a company is concentrating in continuous improvement. Kaizen philosophy, originated from Japan, has been expressed from two Japanese ideograms, Kai (change) and Zen (for the better) means continuous improvement and it is based to the concept that continuous small improvement activities should be applied as part of the entire company involving all levels of employees (Palmer, 2001, pp. 55-56). Specific strategy has been applied after the World War II by the Japanese industry and Toyota in search of process improvement and optimization. The concept was introduced by (Imai, 1986) and includes several tools, known as Kaizen Umbrella.

Figure 2-17 Kaizen umbrella adapted from (Imai, 1986, p. 4)

Imai states that there are three levels (management, groups and persons) and three pillars in the implementation of Kaizen: housekeeping, waste elimination and standardization (Imai, 1986).

Dissertation

45


Imai introduces a similar cycle of Deming’s PDCA, named SDCA (Standard, do, Check, Act) where a continuous improvement in small stages is being performed. Standardization plays a vital role and protects the organization from setbacks but at the same time averts unexpected innovations that are possible in the PDCA cycle. When implementing Kaizen, organizations may have qualitative and quantitative benefits. Businesses powerfully highlight the participation of all the employees with some level of empowerment given to them to recognize and resolve problems connected to the workplace issues. Kaizen, can inspire employees to think differently about their tasks and increase the morale, since they will feel part of the decision-making process. A prerequisite of the success is the education and training (Alukal, 2006, pp. 11-22). Kaizen practices can support companies to have economic benefits and to do improvements regarding cost, quality, productivity, safety and flexibility and progress operator skills by emerging a working culture that inspires employees to aware the key goals of business (Alukal, 2006, pp. 11-22) (Macpherson, et al., 2015, pp. 3-9).

2.6.6 SIX SIGMA Six Sigma was introduced by Bob Galvin at Motorola in 1984, whereas Bill Smith is considered as father of Six Sigma. Jack Welch at General Electric in 1995, initiated the most extensive undertaking of Six Sigma methodology (Pyzdek, 2003, p. 4). (Pyzdek, 2003) Defines Six Sigma as “a rigorous, focused and highly effective implementation of proven quality principles and techniques”. The name of Six Sigma, derived from statistics and the greek letter σ is interconnected with statistics and Standard Deviation, an important measure of variation. Processes at Six Sigma should have a performance of only 3.4 defects per million opportunities (DPMO) leading to a perfect output of 99.99966%. (Pyzdek, 2003, p. 3) The international literature considers Six Sigma to be a vehicle for quality planning and improvement with emphasis on the process. Six Sigma is presented as a revolutionary strategy which aims to interconnect the voice of the customer (VOC) with the voice of the business (VOB) and the voice of process (VOP). (Pande & Holpp, 2001, pp. 7-12) Dissertation

46


It contains a series of tools from statistics and quality management interlaced in a business problem-solving methodology. Process improvement method applied is under DMAIC cycle (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control). Define the process that needs improvement, measure by collecting data and analysis the most critical independent factors (X’s) that impact the dependent factors (Y’s) according customer. Analyze the current operation and the factors through statistical analysis. Improve, by designing and implementing solutions. Control by verifying the implementation and setting a control plan through Statistical Process Control methods (SPC). (Pyzdek, 2003, pp. 8-16) Methodology uses a structure data driven problem solving approach, with different tools that are employed to span and pick projects, form new products and processes, reform current processes, shrink downtime and recover customer response time. (Pande, et al., 2000, pp. 19-43) (Pfeifer, et al., 2004) states that Six Sigma is being considered as the “modern form of quality management”, and points out that Six Sigma is the most efficacious concept due to the link amongst strategy, organizational structures, procedures, tools and methods. He presents a comparison of Six Sigma and Quality management systems as described in the below table and supports that the amalgamation of Six Sigma with quality management systems is an added value step to TQM as per below figure 2-18. Πίνακας 2-8 Comparison of Six Sigma and quality management systems depicted from Table I (Pfeifer, et al., 2004, p. 246) Six sigma

Quality management systems

Objective

Monetary benefit through customer satisfaction

Customer satisfaction through high quality

Strategy

High quality level/low failure rates in all business processes

Management

Commitment and clear objectives for projects, creating an

products Arranging business processes according to requirements of standards Listing of management responsibilities

organisational structure which pursues the objectives Organisation

Process owner (green belts); project officer (black belts)

Process owner; management representative

Regarded

Required

resources

resources)

environment

Training

In all areas of an organisation, different levels of

Required, but not specified

(responsible for QMS) resources

for

projects

(basically

human

Human resources, infrastructure and work

qualification dependant on the function in processes Project

DMAIC/DMADV (continuous improvement approach)

management

PDCA (model for continuous improvement, voluntary)

Process approach

SIPOC (approach for describing single processes)

Model of a process-based QMS

Methods

Specified toolbox

No specification

Documentation

No specification

Listing of requirements

Dissertation

47


It makes sense to blend these two different approaches at the same time, since Six sigma suggests an objective-oriented approach for the selection of projects, which potentials a big monetary success. In parallel, the implementation of QMS process audits facilitates a continuous and systematic search for all current improvement potentials in the enterprises.

Figure 2-18 Integration of Six Sigma and QMS depicted from Figure 1 (Pfeifer, et al., 2004, p. 247)

There are controversial opinions in regards the relationship or the similarity of Six Sigma with TQM and Lean. (Dahlgaard & Dahlgaard‐Park, 2006) conclude that Lean production and Six Sigma include philosophies of the same origin as TQM and that it all these methodologies are not quick fixes, but require a rigorous company culture. (Arnheiter & Maleyeff, 2005) state that Lean and Six Sigma have different roots; Six Sigma from TQM and statistical metrics focusing final product quality, whereas Lean from Japanese TPS, aiming to increase product flow velocity. (Stamatis, 2002, pp. 94-95) stresses that the foundations of TQM are scattered all over the Six Sigma approach towards quality. (Pyzdek, 2001) declared that there is a difference among TQM and Six Sigma towards management holistic approach. Unlike TQM, Six Sigma has a concrete framework to assist businesses succeed. It has been noticed from the international articles that the last decade trend is the combination of the Lean and Six Sigma methodologies that will eventually lead to business excellence. The integration of the common tools that can be seen below (Chaurasia, et al., 2016).

Dissertation

48


Kaizen

Lean Kanban Total productive maintainance Value stream map Single minute exchange of die Cellular manufacturing One piece flow Group technology Elemination of work Visual workplace

Control chart Cause and effect Fault tree analysis Pareto analysis Group problem solving Visual Management Histogram Brain storming Poka yoke Standardization Process Map Seven quality tools

Six Sigma Statistical process control Failure mode and effect analysis Quality function deployment Design of experiment Regression analysis Analysis of variance Robust design Capability analysis Measurement analysis Hypothesis testing Elemination of work Visual workplace

Figure 2-19 Specific common tools to implement Lean, Six Sigma and Lean Six Sigma depicted from Figure 3. (Chaurasia, et al.,2016)

Lean Six Sigma (LSS) has no such a standard definition; the combination improves efficiency through process flow optimization and waste minimization (Lean) and effectiveness through defect and variation reduction (Six Sigma) (Arnheiter & Maleyeff, 2005). According to (Fragkiskos, 2015) Lean Six Sigma penetration in Greece is rather small, even due to economic recession, even though that a lot of professionals are trained. Organizations do not have a culture maturity and believe that current methodology applies only for big enterprises. A research study in 91 ISO9001 certified Greek manufacturing companies demonstrated that organizations face multiple difficulties such as implementation patterns of Six Sigma methodology, absence of human interest and support and low-quality management level (Psomas, 2016). In the service industry, three critical aspects where identified towards successful LSS implementation: committed leadership, HRs support activities and practices and systems (Tsironis & Psychogios, 2016). The ISO published in 2011, following the great influence of methodology, standard 13053-2011 Quantitative methods in process improvement -- Six Sigma – DMAIC methodology and Tools and techniques in order to solidify and fuse the methodology (International Organization for Standardization, 2011). In 2015, a new standard 18404:2015 Quantitative methods in process improvement -- Six Sigma -- Competencies for key personnel and their organizations in relation to Six Sigma and Lean implementation launched in order to set the

Dissertation

49


competency requirements for individuals and organizations (International Organization for Standardization, 2015).

2.6.7 EFQM – EUROPEAN FOUNDATION FOR QUALITY MANAGEMENT While the employment of an ISO 9001 management system is considered as the first step to TQM, the enterprises are looking for more holistic frameworks towards business excellence. Since 1992, a growing number of companies have applied the European Business Excellence Model, established by the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM). The EFQM was founded in 1989 by European enterprises with the support of the European Union. The main objective of EFQM is the broadcasting and application of the TQM philosophy in Europe in order to increase competitiveness of the European organizations. (Anastasiadou & Zirinoglou, 2015, pp. 411-431). The EFQM Excellence Model was offered as an assessment framework for enterprises for the European Quality Award and institutes the most widespread tool in Europe (Eskildsen & Dahlgaard, 2000) According to EFQM, “excellence is about doing your best” and going beyond the minimum regulatory framework in which the group operates and to endeavor to comprehend and exceed the expectations of their stakeholders in society." (EFQM, 2017) There are eight Fundamental Concepts of Excellence of the EFQM as shown below (EFQM, 2017):

Figure 2-20 Fundamental Concepts of Excellence of the EFQM depicted from (EFQM, 2017, p. 3)

Dissertation

50


The EFQM criteria include five enablers and four results as depicted in the picture below (EFQM, 2017):

Figure 2-21 The EFQM Excellence Model depicted from (EFQM, 2017, p. 4)

The “Enablers” criteria observe the internal organization, and the results criteria study what the organization accomplishes. This model practices self-assessment as an instrument to recognize the strengths as well as the areas in which an organization has room for improvement. In other words, self-assessment suggests inclusive and consistent review of an organization’s activities and results against the criteria of the model. (EFQM, 2017) Part of the EFQM model is the RADAR approach that highlights the importance of continuous improvement in harmony with PDCA-Cycle and in alignment with DMAIC approach, even though DMAIC refers to single improvement cycle. (EFQM, 2017)

Figure 2-22 Radar Approach depicted from (EFQM, 2017, p. 6)

It is interesting to explore how the revised standards ISO 9001:2015 and ISO 14001:2015 relating to the EFQM Excellence Model. ISO 9001 and the EFQM Excellence Model are diverse methods; ISO devotes to reliable delivery of products and services that match customer requirements and appropriate legal and controlling procedures and intends to improve customer satisfaction. The EFQM Excellence Model guides organizations towards excellence, considering all their stakeholders. In practice, Dissertation

51


a lot of organizations implement both approaches. The changes in the revised ISO 9001 make it even more attractive to do so. (EFQM, 2017) In the table below we can see the main differences between them:

Figure 2-23 Remarkable differences between ISO and EFQM as depicted from (EFQM, 2017, p. 11)

According to EFQM (EFQM, 2017) the blend of ISO 9001 and the EFQM Excellence Model will strengthen an enterprise that focuses on quality management, on continuous improvement, risk management and innovation. EFQM is also compatible with Lean and can be employed to mature and implement the improvements emphasized from the EFQM Assessment in a planned and methodical manner. (EFQM, 2013) EFQM is embodied in Greece by the Hellenic Management Association (HMA) since 1999 offering the EFQM excellence award and 3 Levels of Excellence awards. According to HMA from 2001 to 2016 Greece had, cumulatively, 93 business entities at the “Committed to Excellence in Europe” level (Hellenic Management Association, 2017)

Dissertation

52


2.7 Summary In today’s world, companies are certain that yesterday’s solutions will not bring competitive performance. Modern organizations are required to achieve agile and fast continuous improvements, high performance and strive for excellence and sustainability. For them to be able to act simultaneously, they should prudently select effective quality improvement practices that meet their culture, bring and preserve the desired results, while their people are trained and capable to handle changes and respective techniques. In order companies to highly competitive, they should strategically combine well governed management systems along with Quality Management Systems backed up with wisely selected methodologies for Quality Continuous Improvement. Some of the key benefits of blending both tendencies with a wide-ranging Management system are: overwhelming the refusal to change, boost the commitment to the initiatives and refund for the gaps of the individual methodologies, as these methodologies are complementary. Most of the methodologies described above, share the common spirit that the processes can be always improved and that by measuring your initiatives, you can always improve. People are the key to success or extraordinary success. - Azim Premji

Dissertation

53


3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This chapter presents the research methodology including the research design, setting, and population. The survey research method has been chosen to determine the impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management Systems and Quality Improvement programs of Greek companies. A pilot phase has been initiated prior fullscale data collection as described below. The sampling technique as well as the data collection instrument are explained further below. The data collection along with the data analysis and limitations are also contained within this chapter.

3.1 Research design This research was based on simple probability random sampling though the creation of a questionnaire. Data came via the economical and professional chambers of Greece as well as certification agencies, that send the survey through newsletters and via email (APPENDIX D – DATA COLLECTION) to a wide range of industrial sectors and company sizes to the Greek area. Since no official database with businesses that have adopted ISO certification in Greece exists, the usage of the subject method was the only one able to offer useful information. 439 companies replied to the Google forms survey, where out of them 435 were using a QMS system and 285 QI programs. The respective certified enterprises representing 849 QMS certificates and 447 QI different programs. Thus, the above figures constitute a good approximation of total QMS certifications in Greece since the total of 9080 as reported by the (International Organization for Standardization, 2015) . The QI program statistics in Greek area are unknown from bibliography.

3.2 Measurement procedures The method of e-mail survey and newsletter is used in this research, due to the characteristics of the population described above. The questions were verbalized based on the objectives, research questions of this research. A cover letter is attached to the survey explaining the purpose of the research, along with contact information.

Dissertation

54


3.3 Data collection instruments The survey feedback was collected from the period between January and March 2017 through Google forms. The data has been recorded and updated simultaneously as responses are received. Respondents were anonymous, so they can express free; they could specify their identity only if they desired, during last point of submission. 3.3.1 Development of the questionnaire The literature review indicated that economic recession influenced their attitude towards quality. This study endeavored to recognize reasons why numbers of ISO certifications and strategies have been decreasing. The literature review indicated that Greek companies face numerous challenges to use quality systems effectively and continuously during this challenging period. These challenges were categorized into individual perceptions and variables affecting the likelihood of using and maintaining Quality management systems and strategies. The data will be conversed in Chapter 4 per the appropriate sections of the questionnaire and thereafter the data will be summarized. The questionnaire was grounded on the literature review (see Chapter 2) and other research instruments employed in similar studies. The questionnaire was designed and piloted before full scale communication. Changes suggested in language and format were implemented. 3.3.2 Structure of the questionnaire The questionnaire (APPENDIX A - SURVEY) consisted of the following four sections: Personal (biographical) data (5 closed questions) Section A Quality Management Systems benefits (2 closed and 2 Likert scale) Section B Relationship among Quality management systems and recession (6 closed and Likert scale) Section C Quality Management Strategies and recession (6 closed and Likert scale)

Dissertation

55


The questions contained in the form, including both open-ended and closed questions, attempted to identify factors contributing to recession effect to quality management.

3.4 Data analysis method The data processing has been done using SPSS 24 and tools facilitated in the Google Form website. Fundamentally, the analysis used mostly nominal and ordinal data analysis techniques such as Factor Analysis, Chi-Square test and Cross Tabulation Analysis along with descriptive statistics. In order to examine the validity and reliability of the questionnaire results, will use Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. The data analysis begins with graphical demonstration of the demographics, in summarized pie and bar charts and descriptive statistics. The validity of the questionnaire is based on previous schemes as described in bibliography, all the selected characteristics were based to previous literature.

3.5 Research Limitations The key limitations in data collection were two: Time and questionnaire size. Since the questionnaires were collected for the dissertation, the time for responding to the questionnaire was limited (three months). On the top, the questionnaire size was critical in order to receive an adequate sample size, so was limited especially in the part C. Furthermore, the fact that the sample was selected from one country (Greece) bounds the generalizability of the findings in other countries under economic recession. To delimit this study’s characteristics, future research studies should be carried out worldwide or in European countries. Another possible limitation is the fact that the data does not constitute objective but subjective business evidence collected from the quality managers / representative, since no financial data has been used. Thus, the findings were consistent with research in perceptual distortion and self-rating bias. Last point is the fact that there is no previous study in this respect, so no comparison could be made with the era before the economic crisis.

Dissertation

56


3.6 Conclusion This chapter conversed the research methodology of the study and defined the research design, measurement procedures, data collection instrument, data analysis method and limitations. Chapter 4 covers the findings.

Dissertation

57


4 DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS 4.1 Introduction In this chapter, the analysis of the data is described, followed by a discussion of the research findings. The results of the data analysis from the 439 questionnaires are presented. The findings relate to the research questions and the literature review. Data were analyzed to identify, describe and explore the relationship between economic recession and the strategies implemented during these period from Greek enterprises, regarding QMS and QI programs.

4.2 Methods of data analysis and presentation of data Descriptive statistical analysis is presented (APPENDIX B – DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS) to identify frequencies and percentages to answer all the questions in the questionnaire. It is divided to three parts as per questionnaire. Calculation of the sample size was carried out during the planning stage and after the collection for both QMS and QI samples. To determine the power and sample size, we used G* Power tool (Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, 2014). Results for sample size and power size are presented in table ( Πίνακας 0-1 Power and sample size) in (POWER AND SAMPLE SIZE). Sample size is sufficiently powered according to the analysis. Questionnaire reliability analysis and factor analysis is being presented (APPENDIX C - STATISTICAL TESTS) along with correlation analysis, frequency tables and crosstabulation analysis to see the relation between the key factors.

4.3 Discussion of findings

Dissertation

58


In this chapter, the analysis of the objectives of the research are being exposed. Most of the tables resulting from the analysis of data are enlisted in appendix B and C, but some key tables are presented in this chapter for their significant roles in the coming discussions. 4.3.1 Reliability analysis of research findings To measure the internal consistency and reliability of Likert scale used in the questionnaire, will be testing the Cronbach's alpha with SPSS, where α greater than 0.7 shows good reliability (Spector, 1992, p. 34). The results that occurred from the SPSS analysis are presented in the table below. A Reliability analysis was carried out for questions 8, 9 and 19 separately. Πίνακας 4-1 Reliability Statistics

Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha

Q.8 Motives for QMS

Cronbach's

Based on

Alpha

Standardized Items

N of Items

.857

.862

10

.950

.952

11

.959

.959

12

implementation Q.9 Benefits for QMS implementation Q.19 Motives for QI Implementation

Cronbach’s alpha showed the questionnaire to reach acceptable reliability, α = 0.857, 0.950 and 0.959 respectively. Correlations in inter-item correlation matrix less that r = .30 indicate that the item may not belong on the scale. Most of the elements appeared to be worthy from retention. There is one exception, in Question 8 and 9 “conformance with regulation’ variable which increases the α in both cases. As such, removal of this variable should be considered. (Appendix C QUESTIONNAIRE RELIABILITY ANALYSIS - Cronbach's alpha).

Dissertation

59


4.3.2 Descriptive Statistics 4.3.2.1 Demographic characteristics and general info Demographic data is presented with pie and bar charts as well as frequency tables in APPENDIX B – DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS The organizations participated where distributed as per the official Classification of Products by Activity (CPA) 2008 by Eurostat. (Eurostat, 2008) Highest participation was from services sectors (53,9%) and manufacturing sector (18,7%), followed by whole sale, retail services (9,1%) and construction services (7,7%) (Figure 0-1 Statistical Classification by Activity). 43% of the questionnaires were completed from Attica region, 26% from Central Macedonia when there were participations from all other regions throughout Greece. (One World - Nations Online, 1998) (Figure 0-2 Administrative Region) 55% of the enterprises age is more than 20years, 28% 10-20 years, when only rest of 17% has initiated a company the last 9 years (since the economic crisis year of 2009). (Figure 0-3 Company age) This is an indicator that due to the current situation and uncertainty, there is less desire of business initiation. This situation is depicted in the Total early-stage entrepreneurial activity (TEA) index according to IOBE (FOUNDATION FOR ECONOMIC & INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH, 2016) where from 9.5% of population among 18-64 years was in an early stage entrepreneurial activity drops to 6.7% in 2015.

Figure 4-1 Early-stage entrepreneurial activity (TEA) index according to (FOUNDATION FOR ECONOMIC & INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH, 2016)

Dissertation

60


11% of the answers were originated from large enterprises, 21% medium-sized SMEs, 31% small enterprises and 37% micro enterprises. (Figure 0-4 Enterprise size according to persons employed) 15% of the respondents were Quality Managers, 15% quality supervisors, 31% quality responsible, 3% production managers, 24% general managers and 11% as other, including all other roles and demonstrating that in many organizations, especially the small ones, there is no such a person responsible for quality. (Figure 0-5 Job title) 4.3.2.2 Part One – Quality Management Systems motivation and benefits In this first part of the questionnaire with 9 questions, the organizations participating in the survey are requested to reply which Quality Management systems are using and when they received their first certificate. It is also requested to reply on the benefits received from implementation as were identified by literature review (see Chapter 2). Almost 45% are using ISO 9001 out of the respondents, 14% ISO 14001, 10% ISO 22000, 6% HACCP, when the rest of the QMS are in 3%. In other category 11% there were answers like ISO 17025, ISO 17020, ISO 18001, IFS, GMPs, BRC, FSCC 22000. It is evident that every company uses more than 1 standard. Out of 439 companies 194 companies (44,19%) were using more than one standard. ISO 9001 is being seen as the basic standard and as we notice, it is applicable in all types and sizes of enterprises. (Figure 0-1 Which QMS do you use?) 29% of the enterprises got their first certification more than 10 years ago, 23% got their certification 8-10 years ago, 17% 6-7 years ago, 9% 3-5 years, less than a year 6% and not certified yet 6%. (Figure 0-2 Years since first certification) It is very interesting to do a comparison in order to see at what age the companies entering in the process of implementing a QMS system and eventually get certified.

Dissertation

61

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Table 4-1 Summary of company age vs Years since first certificate Age of company 20+ years 10-20 years

6-9 years

4-5 years 1-3 years

Less than 1 year

Years since first certificate % 10+ years 44.81% Not certified yet 3.32% 8-10 years 31.15% Not certified yet 4.92% 6-7 years 48.65% 1-3 years 13.51% 3-5 years 13.51% 6-7 years 48.65% 8-10 years 10.81% Less than 1 year 8.11% Not certified yet 5.41% 1-3 years 38.89% 3-5 years 27.78% Less than 1 year 22.22% Not certified yet 11.11% 1-3 years 42.11% Less than 1 year 36.84% Not certified yet 21.05% Not certified yet 100%

From the comparison, it is evident, that during the economic recession, the younger companies are facing challenges in getting certified during their first years of existence.

Figure 4-2 Enterprises not certified yet per age

In the next question, the respondents had to evaluate ten possible motives regarding implementation of QMS as were emerged by the bibliography. As we see in the (Figure 0-3 Reasons / motives of implementing QMS) the respondents believe by 79.04% (strongly agree & agree) that Improving organization’s public image was the most critical motive. Product and/or service quality (73,58%), increase customer satisfaction (73,58%), Demand and/or pressure from customers / suppliers who want it (72.89%) and Competition and customer requirements (71,98%) are also important as motive. Less important motives are Conformance with regulation

Dissertation

62


(58,09%), Improving productivity and/or efficiency and increase of sales (60.82%), Improving Staff performance (62.41%), Internal change of culture (64.92%). Next question is regarding the benefits they have experienced during implementation of QMS and the overall satisfaction rate. From (Figure 0-4 Perceived benefits from QMS and overall satisfaction rate) and (Figure 0-5 Overall satisfaction regarding implementation of QMS) we see that Improving the organization’s public image (56,04%), Increase customer satisfaction (55.81%), Improving process and procedures ( 55,58%), Demand and/or pressure from customers / suppliers who want it (55.13%) . It is noticeable that Improving productivity and/or efficiency and increase of sales is the lowest (40.09%). The overall satisfaction is 53.99% (great deal & much) when neutral is 30%. Comparing Motives vs Perceived benefits of QMS we see that the biggest difference lies among Improving the organization’s public image (23.01%), Competition and customer requirements (22.78%) and Improving productivity and/or efficiency and increase of sales (20.73%) when the ones with the lowest difference are Improving Staff performance (15.26%) and Conformance with regulation (5.24%). (Figure 0-6 Motives vs Perceived value QMS)

4.3.2.3 Part Two – QMS and Economic recession In the second part of the survey, the enterprises responded regarding the effect of economic recession into QMS and how they deal with the current situation. In this part 6 questions are included (10th to 15th). Tenth question was, if the economic recession has impacted the maintenance and issuance of new QMS certificates. The majority (59.45%) believes that economic recession has impacted negatively or very negatively. (Figure 0-1 Impact of economic recession to the issuance and maintenance of QMS certificates in Greece). Eleventh question was related to the organization belief if the quality of their products and/or services has been impacted during economic recession. We see that the majority believe that it remained stable, when 26% admits that their quality has been affected by economic recession, when a 30% managed to improve quality during the

Dissertation

63


same period. (Figure 0-2 Impact of economic recession to quality of products and/or services). Twelfth question was regarding the company strategy towards the crisis. The respondents had to select from 11 different strategies as were selected from the bibliography. We notice in the spider chart that, decrease of operational costs, renegotiation with customers (Sales, lower prices etc.), search of new sales markets, decrease of cost of production and extroversion were the top 5 strategies employed. 50,11% mentioned as strategy the focus on the quality, where 32,80% (among the lowest employed reduced staffing levels strategy.

(Figure 0-3 Business strategy

selection during economic turndown) Third question, was if during economic turndown, they have increased or decreased the certificates: We see 19% decrease and 29% increased, 52% remained stable. (Figure 0-4 Status of QMS certificates during recession) Fourteenth question was related their prediction about 2020: In 3 years from now, how many QMS certifications they believe they will have. 42% were positive that they will have more, were 21% believe they will have less. (Figure 0-5 QMS certifications in 2020) Fifteenth question was related the challenges they face in order to renew / issue their certificate. They had to select from 5 different categories as depicted by bibliography. Lack of immediate monetary benefits and big cost seem to be the main challenges. (Figure 0-6 Challenges to renew or issue QMS certificate during Economic Recession) 4.3.2.4 Part Three QI programs – motives and strategies during recession In the third part of the survey, the enterprises responded regarding the effect of economic recession into QI programs and how they deal with the current situation. In this part 6 questions are included (16th to 21nd). Out of the 439 companies surveyed, 287 have implemented a QI program (65.37%). Out of the 287 companies, 180 are using more than 1 QI program (62,71%). Lean (36%) and TQM (21%) are the most used, when BPR (9%) and EFQM (5%) are less popular. (Figure 0-1 Which QI program do you use?)

Dissertation

64


Regarding their overall satisfaction from the implementation of QI programs, 77% are positive and very positive, only 6% negative and very negative. (

Figure 0-2 Overall satisfaction from the implementation of QI programs) 17% are using QI programs more than 10 years, 15% 8-10 years, 17% 5-7 years, 18% 4-5 years, 25% 1-3 years, 8% less than a year. We see that during economic recession (68%) have implemented QI programs. (Figure 0-3 How many years do you use the QI programs). Regarding the reasons / motives of implementing the QI programs, as selected by bibliography, Provision of high quality products and services (80,35%) seems to be the main reason. Possible benchmarking with other businesses / organizations (68.66%), Possibility of exploiting significant market opportunities (67.61%) and Comply with technological developments and changes (67.25%) seem to be the most important motives. Less important motives were Merge with another business or sector (29.23%), loss of market share (40.85%) and unhappy customers 42.61%. (Figure 0-4 Reasons/ motives for Implementation QI programs) 8% believes that QI programs increased during economic turndown, 78% that remained stable and 14% that decreased. This is an indication that QI programs are Dissertation

65


being considered as a continuous intend to improve internally and consistency in the key to success. (Figure 0-5 Impact of Economic recession to QI programs) Last question is related to the challenges that companies are facing during implementation as pointed out by bibliography. Lack of knowledge and training (16%) is the key obstacle, followed by lack of financial resources (14%), lack of resources – staff (13%), difficulty in applying / maintaining on a stable basis (13%) and culture of the company is not ready to change (10%). Less critical were they can applicable only in manufacturing (4%), data required not available (5%). (Figure 0-6 Challenges during implementation of QI programs)

4.3.3 Contingency tables To look the relationships among the nominal or ordinal variables we will perform crosstabulation with Chi square analysis ( APPENDIX C - STATISTICAL TESTS).

The joint frequency distribution determines if the variables are statistically independent or if they are associated. If there is dependency between variables, then other indicators of association (Cramer’s V, gamma, Sommer’s d), can be used to define the grade which the values of one variable predict or vary with those of the other variable. Chi square test doesn’t indicate though, the causal relationship among them. There are more advanced techniques such as log-linear models and multinomial regression to clarify the relationships contained in contingency tables. (Minitab Inc., 2016) The Research and Null hypothesis will be: H0 = all variables are statistically independent. H1= all variables are statistically dependent. The research hypothesis (H1) declares that the variables are related in the population; the null hypothesis declares that they are not related in the population If P value > 0.05, fail to reject the null hypothesis If p value < 0.05, reject the null hypothesis Initially we will focus on Part A, question 9 (What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS) is being examined with multiple variables to

Dissertation

66


examine relation. Then motives and benefits are also examined towards overall satisfaction. Next, we analyze the strategies (Part B.) employed during economic recession (question 12) with different variables of part A. We also examine the motives, benefits and difficulties (question 15) with different variables of part A and B. In the last part, we do the same analysis for QI programs (overall satisfaction, strategies, benefits with different variables of part A, B and C. Analysis has been done with SPSS Statistics 24. 4.3.3.1

Relationship of QMS overall benefit

We analyzed 54 different variables with the QMS overall benefit. As we can see from the table below, Overall benefit is associated to Classification (Manufactured products), Region (Attica, Eastern Macedonia & Thrace and Central Macedonia), Company Age ( >1, 10-20, 20+), Company size ( >5) and Certificate (14001), since p 5 Benefits QMS_overall satisfaction* 6-9 Benefits QMS_overall satisfaction* 10-45 Benefits QMS_overall satisfaction* 50-100 Benefits QMS_overall satisfaction* 10-250

Dissertation

χ2

df p ( sig)

93.430a

72

0.046

84.390a

48

0.001

33.895a

20

0.027

43.971a

20

0.002

2.299a

4

0.681

9.323a

4

0.054

1.911a

4

0.752

11.140a

4

0.025

6.568a

4

0.161

9.402a

4

0.052

5.908a

4

0.206

2.505a

4

0.644

6.327a

4

0.176

5.083a

4

0.279

6.553a

4

0.161

2.906a

4

0.574

3.724a

4

0.445

3.432a

4

0.488

4.390a

4

0.356

6.113a

4

0.191

.579a

4

0.965

5.339a

4

0.254

19.106a

4

0.001

χ2

df p ( sig)

2.357a

4

0.670

1.597a

4

0.809

5.438a

4

0.245

4.933a

4

0.294

1.874a

4

0.759

2.204a

4

0.698

8.015426

4

0.091

4.217a

4

0.377

13.204a

4

0.010

21.642a

4

0.000

4.567a

4

0.335

12.698a

4

0.013

5.866a

4

0.209

25.205a

4

0.000

4.083a

4

0.395

4.130a

4

0.389

4.613a

4

0.329

3.107a

4

0.540

1.883a

4

0.757

.945a

4

0.918

10.298a

4

0.036

1.978a

4

0.740

2.800a

4

0.592

7.846a

4

0.097

10.329a

4

0.035

9.808a

4

0.044

10.106a

4

0.039

9.074a

4

0.059

3.458a

4

0.484

6.002a

4

0.199

26.088a

4

0.000

68

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises 4.3.3.2

Relationship of QMS Benefits and Motives

We analyze the strategies employed during crisis and the motives of implementation with the overall satisfaction. We see in the below table (Πίνακας 4-3 QMS overall satisfaction vs QMS benefits and Motives) that all benefits and motives

presented to the questionnaire as derived by bibliography seem to associate with the overall satisfaction since p5 Better selection of suppliers * ACCOMMODATION AND FOOD SERVICES Better selection of suppliers * Classification Better selection of suppliers * ISO 14001 Better selection of suppliers * ISO 22000 Better selection of suppliers * MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS Better selection of suppliers * Peloponnese Better selection of suppliers * PROFESSIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL SERVICES

χ2

df p ( sig)

a

1

0.039

a

1

0.043

a

18

0.007

a

1

0.004

a

1

0.023

a

1

0.002

a

1

0.007

a

1

0.001

4.282 4.082

36.273 8.449 5.176 9.171 7.199

10.379

Decrease cost of production and operational costs as we see in the table below is associated to Attica and Central Macedonia region, related to classification, to Electricity, gas, steam, air-conditioning, manufacturing and services sectors, to SMEs (10-45 and 50-100), employee size, and ISO 22000 & ISO 9001 standards. Πίνακας 4-5 Decrease cost of production strategy Variable Decrease cost of production * Attica Decrease cost of production * Central Macedonia Decrease cost of production * Classification Decrease cost of production * ELECTRICITY, GAS, STEAM AND AIR CONDITIONING Decrease cost of production * ISO 22000 Decrease cost of production * ISO 9001 Decrease cost of production * MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS Decrease cost of production * OTHER SERVICES Decrease cost of production * PROFESSIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL SERVICES Decrease operational costs * 10-45 Decrease operational costs * 50-100 Decrease operational costs * Employees

χ2

df p ( sig)

a

1

a

1

0.007

a

12

0.021

a

1

0.043

a

1

0.006

a

1

0.009

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.014

a

1

0.032

a

1

0.022

a

1

0.008

a

5

0.035

11.548 7.325

23.875 4.090 7.573 6.819

13.932 6.045 4.592 5.248 7.037

11.991

Develop and train staff as we see in the table below are associated to minor and bigger enterprises, to accommodation and food services sector, to Attica and Central Macedonia regions, to ISO 14001 and 22000 standards.

Dissertation

70

0.001

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Πίνακας 4-6 Develop and train staff strategy Variable Develop and train staff * >5 Develop and train staff * 100-250 Develop and train staff * 6-9 Develop and train staff * ACCOMMODATION AND FOOD SERVICES Develop and train staff * Attica Develop and train staff * Central Macedonia Develop and train staff * Classification Develop and train staff * ISO 14001 Develop and train staff * ISO 22000 Develop and train staff * Region

χ2

df p ( sig)

a

1

0.001

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.008

a

1

0.009

a

1

0.018

a

1

0.038

a

18

0.050

a

1

0.001

a

1

0.035

a

5

0.000

11.343 19.174 7.108 6.891 5.550 4.307

28.879 12.060 4.468

32.540

Extroversion strategy as we see in the table below is associated to manufactured products, wholesale and retail trade services sectors, to Peloponnese region, to ISO 14001 and 22000 standards. Πίνακας 4-7 Extroversion strategy Variable Extroversion * Classification Extroversion * ISO 14001 Extroversion * ISO 22000 Extroversion * MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS Extroversion * Peloponnese Extroversion * WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE SERVICES

χ2

df p ( sig)

a

18

0.043

a

1

0.002

a

1

0.046

a

1

0.001

a

1

0.005

a

1

0.014

29.419 9.809 3.995

10.392 7.939 6.044

Focus on Quality as seen below, it is associated to minor and bigger companies, to Attica and Central Macedonia, to Administrative and support services, manufactured products and wholesale and retail trade services, to ISO 20000 standard. Πίνακας 4-8 Focus on quality strategy Variable Focus on quality * >5 Focus on quality * 100-250 Focus on quality * ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPPORT SERVICES Focus on quality * Attica Focus on quality * Central Macedonia Focus on quality * Classification Focus on quality * Employees Focus on quality * ISO 20000 Focus on quality * MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS Focus on quality * Region Focus on quality * WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE SERVICES

χ2

df p ( sig)

a

1

0.005

a

1

0.001

a

1

0.001

a

1

0.023

a

1

0.007

a

18

0.005

a

5

0.002

a

1

0.047

a

1

0.000

a

12

0.004

a

1

0.042

7.771

10.627 11.555 5.204 7.202

37.243 18.694 3.960

12.998 28.945 4.144

Improve productivity and operational restructuring as seen below, it is associated to minor and bigger companies, to Attica and Central Macedonia, to

Dissertation

71


Professional services, manufactured products and wholesale and retail trade services, to ISO 20000 and ISO 14000 standard. Operational restructuring strategy is associated to Human and Health sector, ISO 14001 and ISO 50001 standard. Πίνακας 4-9 Improve productivity and operational restructuring strategies Variable Improve productivity * >5 Improve productivity * 100-250 Improve productivity * Classification Improve productivity * Employees Improve productivity * ISO 14001 Improve productivity * ISO 22000 Improve productivity * MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS Improve productivity * PROFESSIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL SERVICES Improve productivity * WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE SERVICES Operational restructuring * HUMAN HEALTH AND SOCIAL WORK SERVICES Operational restructuring * ISO 14001 Operational restructuring * ISO 50001

χ2

df p ( sig)

a

1

a

1

0.000

a

18

0.000

a

5

0.000

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.035

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.005

a

1

0.035

a

1

0.022

a

1

0.017

a

1

0.002

21.598 26.134 62.115 40.243 14.184 4.424

39.755 7.957 4.464 5.257 5.720 9.900

0.000

Reduced staff level strategy is associated to small and bigger SMEs, to accommodation and food services, education services and manufactured products, to Attica and Central Macedonia region and to ISO 9001 standard. Πίνακας 4-10 Reduced staff level strategy Variable Reduced staffing level * 100-250 Reduced staffing level * 10-45 Reduced staffing level * 6-9 Reduced staffing level * ACCOMMODATION AND FOOD SERVICES Reduced staffing level * Attica Reduced staffing level * Central Macedonia Reduced staffing level * Classification Reduced staffing level * EDUCATION SERVICES Reduced staffing level * Employees Reduced staffing level * ISO 9001 Reduced staffing level * MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS Reduced staffing level * Region

χ2

df p ( sig)

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.033

a

1

0.010

a

1

0.017

a

1

0.003

a

1

0.000

a

18

0.006

a

1

0.024

a

5

0.000

a

1

0.038

a

1

0.001

a

12

0.001

18.657 4.563 6.715 5.694 8.528

15.808 36.402 5.117

25.045 4.298

11.031 33.335

Renegotiate relationships with customers is associated to big SMEs, HACCP, ISO 14001, ISO 22000 standard, manufactured products, public administration and real estate sectors.

Dissertation

72

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Πίνακας 4-11 Renegotiate relationships with customers strategy Variable Renegotiate relationships with customers * 100-250 Renegotiate relationships with customers * Classification Renegotiate relationships with customers * HACCP Renegotiate relationships with customers * ISO 14001 Renegotiate relationships with customers * ISO 20000 Renegotiate relationships with customers * MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS Renegotiate relationships with customers * PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND DEFENCE Renegotiate relationships with customers * REAL ESTATE SERVICES

χ2

df p ( sig)

a

1

0.017

a

18

0.008

a

1

0.047

a

1

0.016

a

1

0.024

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.043

a

1

0.036

5.737 35.583

3.949 5.836 5.115 12.162

4.090 4.402

Search of new sales and synergies strategy is associated to accommodation and food services sector, with HACCP, ISO 14001 and ISO 20000 standard, where the search of synergies strategy is related to ISO 14001 and ISO 9001 standard. Πίνακας 4-12 Search of new sales and synergies strategies Variable Search of new sales markets or activities * ACCOMMODATION AND FOOD SERVICES Search of new sales markets or activities * Classification Search of new sales markets or activities * HACCP Search of new sales markets or activities * ISO 14001 Search of new sales markets or activities * ISO 20000 Search of synergies * ISO 14001 Search of synergies * ISO 9001

4.3.3.4

χ2

df p ( sig)

a

1

a

18

0.008

a

1

0.047

a

1

0.016

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.033

a

1

0.003

15.921 35.583 3.949 5.836

19.950 4.547 8.673

0.000

Relationship of QI programs overall benefit

We examined the relationship of the QI programs overall benefit with 24 variables. As we see from the table below, all tests with significant association are indicated with yellow, p < 0.05. So, Lean, Six Sigma, TQM, Years of application, and all motives included in questionnaire regarding QI implementation, as well as the application during crisis are important variables. In APPENDIX C - STATISTICAL TESTS, statistical analysis of significant variables is demonstrated.

Dissertation

73

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Πίνακας 4-13 Relationship of QI programs overall benefit

χ2 df p ( sig) Variable 60.368 72 0.834 QI_overall satisfaction * Classification 11.127 16 0.802 QI_overall satisfaction * Region 16.99 20 0.654 QI_overall satisfaction * Age 16.99 20 0.654 QI_overall satisfaction * Employees 3.754 4 0.440 QI_overall satisfaction * BPR 7.178 4 0.127 QI_overall satisfaction * Kaizen 27.096 4 0.000 QI_overall satisfaction * Lean 16.034 4 0.003 QI_overall satisfaction * Six Sigma 3.335 4 0.503 QI_overall satisfaction * EFQM 13.439 4 0.009 QI_overall satisfaction * TQM 92.93 24 0.000 QI_overall satisfaction * How many years do you use the above mentioned Quality Improvement programs? QI_overall satisfaction * Management Change

51.315 16

0.000

QI_overall satisfaction * Loss of market share

61.926 16

0.000

QI_overall satisfaction * Competitition - Other companies using similar strategies

69.192 16

0.000

QI_overall satisfaction * Unhappy customers

69.201 16

0.000

QI_overall satisfaction * Timely delivery of the product or service

86.789 16

0.000

QI_overall satisfaction * Provision of high quality products and services

113.428 16

0.000

QI_overall satisfaction * Possibility of exploiting significant market opportunities

140.469 16

0.000

88.556 16

0.000

QI_overall satisfaction * Forecasting customer trends and wishes

101.166 16

0.000

QI_overall satisfaction * Comply with technological developments and changes

116.524 16

0.000

QI_overall satisfaction * Pressure to reduce costs

70.186 16

0.000

QI_overall satisfaction * Merge with another business or sector

29.683 16

0.020

QI_overall satisfaction * During recession have you increased or increased your QIPs?

31.473

0.000

QI_overall satisfaction * Possible benchmarking with other businesses / organizations

4.3.3.5

8

Relationship of QI and strategies during Economic Recession

We examine the association of different strategies employed during Recession and different QI programs. Decrease operational cost is associated with Six Sigma, Decrease cost of production is associated with Kaizen, Lean, Six Sigma and TQM, extroversion with TQM, focus on quality with Kaizen, Lean, TQM. Develop and train staff with Lean, Improve productivity with TQM, reduced staffing level with Kaizen, Lean, Six Sigma and TQM.

Dissertation

74

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Πίνακας 4-14 Relationship of QI and strategies during Economic Recession

Variable Decrease operational costs * Six Sigma

df p ( sig)

7.378a

1

0.007

a

1

0.004

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.000

4.214a

1

0.040

a

1

0.003

a

8.615

1

0.003

Focus on quality * Lean

17.805a

1

0.000

Focus on quality * TQM

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.004

a

1

0.033

Reduced staffing level * Kaizen

a

13.249

1

0.000

Reduced staffing level * Lean

24.743a

1

0.000

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.005

Decrease cost of production * Kaizen Decrease cost of production * Lean Decrease cost of production * Six Sigma Decrease cost of production * TQM Extroversion * TQM Focus on quality * Kaizen

Develop and train staff * Lean Improve productivity * TQM

Reduced staffing level * Six Sigma Reduced staffing level * TQM

4.3.3.6

χ2 8.389

17.798 22.890 8.571

22.075 8.122 4.531

18.063 7.901

Relationship of QMS and QI programs

From the respondents that use QMS and QI we examine the association. We notice as per below table that there is association of ISO 9001 with Kaizen, Lean, Six Sigma and TQM. ISO 13485 with Six Sigma and ISO 14001 with BPR and Six Sigma. ISO 20000 with Lean, Six Sigma and TQM, ISO 22000 with Six Sigma, ISO 22301 with Lean, Six Sigma and TQM, ISO 27001 with TQM, ISO 50001 with Lean, Six Sigma and TQM.

Dissertation

75

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Πίνακας 4-15 Relationship of QMS and QI programs

Variable ISO 9001 * Kaizen ISO 9001 * Lean ISO 9001 * Six Sigma ISO 9001 * TQM ISO 13485 * Six Sigma ISO 14001 * BPR ISO 14001 * Six Sigma ISO 20000 * Lean ISO 20000 * Six Sigma ISO 20000 * TQM ISO 22000 * Six Sigma ISO 22301 * Lean ISO 22301 * Six Sigma ISO 22301 * TQM ISO 27001 * Six Sigma ISO 50001 * Lean ISO 50001 * Six Sigma ISO 50001 * TQM

4.3.3.7

χ2

df p ( sig)

4.426a

1

0.035

9.747a

1

0.002

3.848a

1

0.050

6.568a

1

0.010

a

1

0.001

a

1

0.017

a

1

0.008

a

1

0.001

a

1

0.000

a

9.256

1

0.002

3.907a

1

0.048

12.375a

1

0.000

30.778a

1

0.000

11.280a

1

0.001

8.680a

1

0.003

11.829a

1

0.001

42.922a

1

0.000

6.889a

1

0.009

11.554 5.669 7.065

10.992 39.770

Relationship of difficulties vs QMS & QI

Last step is to evaluate association between the difficulties and the QMS and QI programs, there are the below associations as demonstrated in the table below: They cost a lot in order to maintain with ISO 14001, QMS_Challenges_other with HACCP. They do not offer anything different with EFQM, Lack of knowledge and training with Kaizen, Lean, Six Sigma, EFQM, TQM. They can be applicable only in manufacturing with BPR, Lean and Six Sigma. Culture of company is not ready to change with Kaizen, Lean and Six Sigma. Data required is not available with Kaizen and Lean. Lack of support from management with Kaizen, Lean, Six Sigma, TQM.

Dissertation

76

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Πίνακας 4-16 Relationship of difficulties vs QMS & QI

Variable They cost a lot in order to maintain * ISO 14001 QMS_Challenges_other * HACCP They do not offer anything different * EFQM Lack of knowledge and training * Kaizen Lack of knowledge and training * Lean Lack of knowledge and training * Six Sigma Lack of knowledge and training * EFQM Lack of knowledge and training * TQM They can be applicable only in manufacturing * BPR hey can be applicable only in manufacturing * Lean They can be applicable only in manufacturing * Six Sigma Culture of company is not ready to change * Kaizen Culture of company is not ready to change * Lean Culture of company is not ready to change * Six Sigma Data required are not available * Kaizen Data required are not available * Lean Lack of support from management * Kaizen Lack of support from management * Lean Lack of support from management * Six Sigma Lack of support from management * TQM

χ2

df p ( sig)

6.052a

1

0.014

a

1

0.006

a

1

0.026

a

13.702

1

0.000

81.882a

1

0.000

a

1

0.000

a

9.262

1

0.002

33.691a

1

0.000

a

1

0.038

a

1

0.021

a

1

0.018

a

11.238

1

0.001

12.234a

1

0.000

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.015

a

1

0.007

a

29.164

1

0.000

12.149a

1

0.000

a

1

0.002

a

1

0.023

7.543 4.956

20.818

4.293 5.308 5.588

15.703 5.876 7.238

9.985 5.199

4.4 Summary In this chapter, methods data analysis methods and discussion of the findings have been presented. Conclusions from this study have been found to be dependable with the findings of several related studies on motives, benefits and challenges during implementation of QMS and QI programs. In addition, the impact of various demographic data on QMS and QI during recession, has been explored. Data findings were defined as correlations to the study variables and calculated as tabulations. In the next chapter, the conclusions and suggestions of the findings will be discussed.

Dissertation

77


5 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter summarizes the thesis, converses its findings and contributions, presents the limitations of the current work, and pinpoints guidelines for future research.

5.1 Summary of the dissertation A survey has been introduced from December of 2016 to March of 2017 to the Greek enterprises to evaluate the impact of the recession towards the QMS (quality management systems) as well as other Quality Improvement programs (Lean, Six Sigma, Kaizen, TQM, BPR etc.) and their view as a strategy to exit crisis. A Google form questionnaire with twenty-one questions was send to all the Greek chambers and associations as well as Greek companies to all regions to be completed. Analyzing the responses of the quality managers, some conclusions are present regarding their motives and benefits for the implementation of QMS, QI programs and the challenges, as well as their strategies during crisis in Greece. Most of the questionnaires came from Attica and Central Macedonia. The profile of the enterprises that participated were mainly from services, manufacturing sector, whole sale & retail and construction. Most of the companies’ age is 20+ years and 10-20 years. Both large medium sized, small and micro enterprises respondent. The persons that filled in the questionnaire were Quality managers, quality supervisors and quality responsible. Almost half of the enterprises are using ISO9001, less ISO 14001 and ISO 22000. 44.19% are using more than one standard. 1 out of 3 of the enterprises got their first certification more than 10 years age, from the data it seems that the younger companies are facing challenges in getting certified during their first years of existence.

Dissertation

78


Key QMS motives for the correspondents regarding the QMS is the improve of public image, the quality in products and services, the increase of customer satisfaction. Key benefits for the enterprises that participated in the survey is the improve of public image, the increase of customer satisfaction, the improve of process and procedures. The overall satisfaction from the QMS is 53.99% when 30% are neutral. The majority (59.45%) believes that economic recession has impacted negatively or very negatively the issuance and maintenance of QMS certificates. The majority believe that the quality of their products or services during crisis remained stable, when 26% admits that their quality has been affected by economic recession, and 30% managed to improve quality during the same period. Lack of immediate monetary benefits and big cost seem to be the main challenges during Economic recession. During economic turndown, 19% have decreased their QMS certificates and 29% increased. In 3 years from now, 42% were positive that they will have more certificates, were 21% believe they will have less. Regarding the company strategy towards the crisis, decrease of operational costs, renegotiation with customers (Sales, lower prices etc.), search of new sales markets, decrease of cost of production and extroversion were the top 5 strategies employed. 50,11% mentioned as strategy the focus on the quality, where 32,80% (among the lowest employed reduced staffing levels strategy. 65.37% of the QMS certified companies are using a QI program too. Out of them 62.71% are using a combination of more than one QI program. Lean and TQM are the most used. 77% of the companies are overall satisfied with their QI program, only 6% negative. Only 17% are using QI programs more than 10 years, whereas the rest are employed QI programs during recession. Regarding the reasons / motives of implementing the QI programs, provision of high quality products and services seems to be the main reason. Possible benchmarking with other businesses / organizations and possibility of exploiting significant market opportunities are also key factors. Doing a comparison between the motives of QMS vs QI programs we notice that QI programs implementation is being performed due to organizational internal drive to provide high quality products and services and benchmark with competition,

Dissertation

79


and less for unhappy customers; whereas in QMS the drive is external, improving the company’s image and increasing customer satisfaction. Lack of knowledge and training is the key obstacle for Quality Improvement programs during implementation, followed by lack of financial and human resources, difficulty in applying and maintaining programs on a stable basis and due to the culture of the company that is not ready to change.

5.2 Research Contributions The present study provided the Quality management profile of Greek enterprises during economic recession and the strategies implemented. The literature research demonstrated that although QMS and QI programs have been examined through Case studies worldwide, the Greek area was not examined so far. Therefore, the findings in this study can be used as a benchmark for future research in the topic of quality management, interrelation of QMS and QI programs, under similar economic challenges in other countries or in specific industries with the same characteristics.

5.3 Recommendations for Research The present research can and should be developed further; research for a separate study for Quality Improvement Programs and QMS in European countries and their approach during recession period could be of interest. A separate research about QI programs in detail could be of additional benefit. It would be of a value in future research to include employee opinion in the respondents exploring whether different opinions exist among managers and employees regarding Quality initiatives. Future research studies can be based on objective business evidence coming from the documents of the internal QMS and QI sand the company financial indexes. It would also be employed structural equation modelling (SEM analysis) in order to determine the relationship among the factors.

Dissertation

80


References Alukal, G. a. M. A., 2006. Lean Kaizen: a Simplified Approach to Process Improvements,. Milwaukee, Wisconsin: ASQ Quality Press. American Society for Quality, 2016. Quality Glossary Definition: Continuous Improvement. [Online] Available at: http://asq.org/learn-about-quality/continuousimprovement/overview/overview.html [Accessed 01 February 2017]. Anastasiadou, S. D. & Zirinoglou, P. A., 2015. EFQM dimensions in Greek Primary Education System, The Economies of Balkan and Eastern Europe Countries in the Changed World (EBEEC 2015), Procedia Economics and Finance 33. [Online] Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212567115017256 [Accessed 10 January 2017]. Andersson, R., Eriksson, H. & Torstensson, H., 2006. "Similarities and differences between TQM six sigma and lean", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 18 Issue: 3, pp.282-296. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/09544780610660004 [Accessed 02 January 2017]. Anvari, A. I. Y. a. H. S., 2011. A Study on Total Quality Management and Lean Manufacturing: Through Lean Thinking Approach. World Applied Sciences Journal 12 (9). 1585-1596. [Online] Available at: http://www.improvegroup.net/images/ig_library_downloads/Case_Study.pdf [Accessed 20 February 2017]. Arnheiter, E. D. & Maleyeff, J., 2005. "The integration of lean management and Six Sigma", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 17 Issue: 1, pp.5-18,. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/09544780510573020 [Accessed 12 February 2017]. Arvanitoyannis, I. S., 2009. HACCP And ISO 22000 : Application to Foods of Animal Origin. Chichester, U.K. Ames, Iowa : Wiley-Blackwell. Bendell, T., 2005. Structuring business process improvement methodologies.” Total Quality Management, Vol.16, No.8-9, pp.969-978. [Online] Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783360500163110 [Accessed 01 February 2017]. Bendell, T., 2006. A review and comparison of six sigma and the lean organisations, The TQM. Magazine, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 255-62.. [Online] Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09544780610659989 [Accessed 20 February 2017]. Biazzo, S., 1998. A critical examination of the business process re-engineering phenomenon", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18 Issue: 9/10, pp.10001016,. [Online] Dissertation

81

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Available at: doi: 10.1108/01443579810225586 [Accessed 04 January 2017]. Bilalis, D., Stathis, I., Konstantas, A. & Patsiali, S., 2009. Comparison between HACCP and ISO 22000 in Greek organic food sector, Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment Vol.7 (2). [Online] Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Aristidis_Konstantas/publication/255610092_Compariso n_between_HACCP_and_ISO_22000_in_Greek_organic_food_sector/links/5788dfb608ae25 4b1ddce326.pdf [Accessed 02 February 2017]. Bouranta, N., Psomas, E. L. & Pantouvakis, A., 2017. "Identifying the critical determinants of TQM and their impact on company performance: Evidence from the hotel industry of Greece", The TQM Journal, Vol. 29 Issue: 1, pp.147-166. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/TQM-11-2015-0142 [Accessed 10 April 2017]. BSI Group, 2016. BS-OHSAS-18001-Features and Benefits. [Online] Available at: https://www.bsigroup.com/LocalFiles/en-GB/bs-ohsas-18001/resources/BSOHSAS-18001-Features-and-Benefits.pdf [Accessed 12 April 2017]. Chaurasia, B., Garg, D. & Agarwal, A., 2016. "Framework to improve performance through implementing Lean Six Sigma strategies to oil exporting countries during recession or depression",. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-01-2015-0011 [Accessed 14 February 2017]. Chiarini, A., 2011. "Japanese total quality control, TQM, Deming's system of profound knowledge, BPR, Lean and Six Sigma", International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 2 Iss 4 pp. 332 - 355. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/20401461111189425 [Accessed 21 December 2016]. Chiarini, A., 2011. Integrating lean thinking into ISO 9001: a first guideline, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 2 Issue: 2, pp.96-117,. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/20401461111135000 [Accessed 20 February 2017]. Chountalas, P. T., 2010. Τα πρότυπα συστήματα διοίκησης ως παράγων εφαρμογής διοίκησης επιχειρηματικών διεργασιών. Athens: University of Piraeus. Dahlgaard, J. J. & Dahlgaard‐Park, S. M., 2006. "Lean production, six sigma quality, TQM and company culture", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 18 Issue: 3, pp.263-281,. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/09544780610659998 [Accessed 20 February 2017]. Davenport, T., 1993. Process Innovation: Reengineering Work through Information Technology.. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press. Deming, W. E., 1986. Out of the Crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Dissertation

82

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Dervitsiotis, K. N., 1999. "Quality in Greece: past and present", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 11 Issue: 2, pp.84-87. [Online] Available at: doi:10.1108/09544789910257000 [Accessed 17 January 2017]. Dick, G. P., 2000. "ISO 9000 certification benefits, reality or myth?", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 12 Issue: 6, pp.365-371. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/09544780010351517 [Accessed 20 January 2017]. Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), 2017. Winter 2017 Economic Forecast. [Online] Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/ecfin_forecast_winter_1317_el_en_0.pdf [Accessed 17 March 2017]. Eduardo Gadotti Martins, E. P. d. L. S. E. G. d. C., 2015. Developing a quality management system implementation process for a medical device manufacturer Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 26 Issue: 7, pp.955-979,. [Online] Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-12-2012-0119 [Accessed 12 January 2017]. EFQM, 2013. EFQM User Guide: Using Lean within the EFQM Framework. [Online] Available at: http://www.efqm.org/sites/default/files/efqm_lean_user_guide_v1.1.pdf [Accessed 10 February 2017]. EFQM, 2017. An overview of the EFQM Excellence Model. [Online] Available at: http://www.efqm.org/sites/default/files/overview_efqm_2013_v2_new_logo.pdf [Accessed 18 February 2017]. EFQM, 2017. The new ISO Standards on management systems & the EFQM excellence model. [Online] Available at: http://www.efqm.org/sites/default/files/iso_9001_efqm_model.pdf [Accessed 18 February 2017]. Eskildsen, J. & Dahlgaard, J. J., 2000. A causal model for employee satisfaction, Total Quality Management 11(8):1081-1094. [Online] Available at: DOI: 10.1080/095441200440340 [Accessed 13 January 2017]. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, 2017. Worker participation in the management of occupational safety and health — qualitative evidence from ESENER-2 ,Country report - GREECE, European Risk Observatory. [Online] Available at: https://osha.europa.eu/en/tools-and-publications/publications/workerparticipation-management-occupational-safety-and-health/view [Accessed 14 April 2017]. European Communities, 2002. Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002. [Online] Available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=OJ:L:2002:031:TOC [Accessed 4 March 2017].

Dissertation

83

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Evangelos L. Psomas & Dimitrios P. Kafetzopoulos, 2015. HACCP effectiveness between ISO 22000 certified and non-certified dairy companies, Food Control 53. [Online] Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2015.01.023 [Accessed 10 March 2017]. Flynn, B. B., Schroederb, R. G. & Sa, S., 1994. A framework for quality management research and an associated measurement instrument, Journal of Operations Management, Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages 339-366. [Online] Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(97)90004-8 [Accessed 18 January 2017]. Fotopoulos, C. B. & Psomas, E. L., 2008. The impact of ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ TQM elements on quality management results. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 26(2), 150 –163. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/02656710910928798 [Accessed 02 January 2017]. Fotopoulos, C. & Psomas, E., 2009. The use of quality management tools and techniques in ISO 9001:2000 certified companies: the Greek case, International Journal of Productivity and Performance, Management, Vol. 58 Issue: 6, pp.564-580. [Online] Available at: 10.1108/17410400910977091 [Accessed 14 January 2017]. Fragkiskos, E., 2015. Business Process Improvement using Lean Six Sigma: The Hellenic Reality. [Online] Available at: https://apothesis.eap.gr/bitstream/repo/28987/1/Business%20Process%20Improvement%20us ing%20Lean%20Six%20Sigma_The%20Hellenic%20Reality.pdf [Accessed 20 February 2017]. Garvin, D. A., 1984. What does Product Quality really mean? MIT Sloan Management Review 26, no. 1. [Online] Available at: http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/what-does-product-quality-really-mean/ [Accessed 06 January 2017]. Garvin, D. A., 1987. Competing on the Eight Dimensions of Quality. [Online] Available at: https://hbr.org/1987/11/competing-on-the-eight-dimensions-of-quality [Accessed 10 January 2017]. Garvin, D. A., 1988. Managing Quality: The Strategic and Competitive Edge. New York: Free Press. Gasiorowski-Denis, E., 2017. Moving ahead with ISO 45001 for safety and health at work International Organization for Standardization. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/news/Ref2180.html [Accessed 30 April 2017]. Gillies, A., 2011. "Improving the quality of information security management systems with ISO27000", The TQM Journal, Vol. 23 Issue: 4. [Online] Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17542731111139455 [Accessed 15 January 2017].

Dissertation

84

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Gómez Gómez, J., Martínez Costa, M. & Martínez Lorente, Á. R., 2015. EFQM Excellence Model and TQM: an empirical comparison, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 28:1-2, 88-103. [Online] Available at: DOI: 10.1080/14783363.2015.1050167 [Accessed 20 January 2017]. Gotzamani, K. D. & Tsiotras, G. D., 2001. An empirical study of the ISO 9000 standards' contribution towards total quality management, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 21 Issue: 10, pp.1326-1342,. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/EUM0000000005972 [Accessed 07 January 2017]. Gotzamani, K. D. & Tsiotras, G. D., 2002. "The true motives behind ISO 9000 certification" International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 19 Iss 2 pp. 151 - 169. [Online] Available at: doi:10.1108/02656710210413499 [Accessed 08 January 2017]. Guoyou Qi, S. Z. H. Y. H. L., 2013. ISO and OHSAS certifications: How stakeholders affect corporate decisions on sustainability", Management Decision, Vol. 51 Issue: 10. [Online] Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MD-11-2011-0431 [Accessed 15 April 2017]. Hammer, M. & Champy, . J., 1993. Reengineering the corporation: a manifesto. 1st edition ed. New York, NY: HarperBusiness. Harari, O., 1997. Ten reasons why TQM doesn't work.. [Online] Available at: https://www.questia.com/magazine/1G1-19037501/ten-reasons-tqm-doesn-twork [Accessed 10 January 2017]. Hayes , R. H., Pisano, G. P., Upton , D. M. & Wheelwright, S. C., 2004. Operations, Strategy, and Technology: Pursuing the Competitive Edge. 1st Edition ed. New York: Wiley. Hellenic Institute for Occupational Health and Safety, 2006. Ν. 3325/2005 - Ίδρυση και λειτουργία βιομηχανικών, βιοτεχνικών εγκαταστάσεων στο πλαίσιο της αειφόρου ανάπτυξης και άλλες διατάξεις. [Online] Available at: http://www.elinyae.gr/el/item_details.jsp?item_id=5431&cat_id=164 [Accessed 13 February 2017]. Hellenic Management Association, 2017. The elite of businesss excellence. [Online] Available at: http://www.eede.gr/uploads/files/efqm_elite.pdf [Accessed 18 February 2017]. Hellsten, U. & Klefsjö, B., 2000. "TQM as a management system consisting of values, techniques and tools", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 12 Issue: 4, pp.238-244. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/09544780010325822 [Accessed 06 January 2017]. Hines, P., Holweg, M. & Rich, N., 2014. "Learning to evolve: A review of contemporary lean thinking", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 24 Issue: 10, pp.994-1011,. [Online]

Dissertation

85

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Available at: doi: 10.1108/01443570410558049 [Accessed 20 February 2017]. Hoyer, R. W. & Hoyer, B. B., 2001. The Different Definitions of Quality, QUALITY PROGRESS VOL. 34 NO. 7. [Online] Available at: http://asq.org/data/subscriptions/qp/2001/0701/qp0701hoyer.pdf [Accessed 06 January 2017]. Hoyle, D., 2007. Quality Management Essential. Oxford: Elsevier Limited. ICAP Group, 2017. Greece in Figures 2017. [Online] Available at: http://dir.icap.gr/mailimages/ebooks/GrFigures/2017_03_31_13_56_16/document.pdf [Accessed 10 April 2017]. Imai, M., 1986. Kaizen: The Key to Japan’s Competitive Success.. New York: McGraw-Hill. Inc. IBP, 2016. Greece Investment and Business Guide Volume 1 Strategic and Practical Information (World Business and Investment Library). Washington DC : International Business Publications USA. International Organization for Standardisation, 2015. ISO 14001 Key benefits. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/archive/pdf/en/iso_14001__key_benefits.pdf [Accessed 13 February 2017]. International Organization for Standardisation, 2015. Quality management principles. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/archive/pdf/en/pub100080.pdf [Accessed 04 January 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2011. ISO publishes Six Sigma performanceimprovement methodology. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/news/2011/09/Ref1461.html [Accessed 20 February 17]. International Organization for Standardization, 2012. ISO 9000 - Quality management. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/iso-9001-quality-management.html [Accessed 08 January 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2012. ISO and Food. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/archive/pdf/en/iso_and_food.pdf [Accessed 03 March 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2013. ISO/IEC 27001:2013(en) Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso-iec:27001:ed-2:v1:en [Accessed 10 January 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2014. ISO 9000:2015(en) Quality management systems — Fundamentals and vocabulary. [Online]

Dissertation

86

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Available at: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:9000:ed-4:v1:en [Accessed 19 January 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2014. We're ISO: we develop and publish International Standards. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/standards.html [Accessed 03 January 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2015. Achieving environmental focus with ISO 14001:2015. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/2015/11/Ref2013.html [Accessed 13 February 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2015. Introduction to ISO 14001:2015. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/archive/pdf/en/introduction_to_iso_14001.pdf [Accessed 13 February 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2015. ISO 18404:2015. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/standard/62405.html [Accessed 20 February 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2015. ISO 45001 - Briefing notes. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/archive/pdf/en/iso_45001_briefing_note.pdf [Accessed 28 April 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2015. ISO in figures for 2015. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/iso-in-figures.html [Accessed 04 January 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2015. NQIS ELOT. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/member/1759.html [Accessed 02 January 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2016. ISO 13485 Quality Management for medical devices. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/archive/pdf/en/iso_13485_medical_devices_20 16.pdf [Accessed 12 January 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2016. ISO 13485:2016. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/standard/59752.html [Accessed 12 January 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2016. ISO 14001 Environmental Management Systems - Revision. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/iso-14001-revision.html [Accessed 13 February 2017].

Dissertation

87

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises International Organization for Standardization, 2016. ISO Survey. [Online] Available at: http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink?func=ll&objId=18808772&objAction=browse&viewType =1 [Accessed 04 January 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2016. Selection and use of the ISO 9000 family of standards. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/archive/pdf/en/selection_and_use_of_iso_9000 _family_of_standards_2016_en.pdf [Accessed 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2016. The ISO Survey of Management System Standard Certifications 2015. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/standards/conformity_assessment/certification/ doc/survey_executive-summary.pdf [Accessed 04 January 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2016. The process approach in ISO 9001:2015, ISO/TC 176/SC 2/N1289. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/archive/pdf/en/iso9001-2015process-appr.pdf [Accessed 01 February 2017]. International Organization for Standardization, 2017. ISO/IEC 27000 family - Information security management systems. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/isoiec-27001-information-security.html [Accessed 12 January 2017]. International Organization, 2015. Reaping the benefits of ISO 9001. [Online] Available at: https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/archive/pdf/en/reaping_the_benefits_of_iso_9 001.pdf [Accessed 02 January 2017]. Ismyrlis, V. & Moschidis, O., 2015. The effects of ISO 9001 certification on the performance of Greek companies: A multidimensional statistical analysis", The TQM Journal, Vol. Issue: 1, pp.150-162. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/TQM-07-2013-0091 [Accessed 02 January 2017]. Ismyrlis, V., Moschidis, O. & Tsiotras, G., 2015. "Critical success factors examined in ISO 9001:2008-certified Greek companies using multidimensional statistics", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 32 Issue: 2, pp.114-131. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/IJQRM-07-2013-0117 [Accessed 03 January 2017]. Jonker, B. & Pennik , J., 2010. The Essence of research methodology: A consice guide for master and PhD Students in Management science. Heidelberg: Springer.

Dissertation

88

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Juran, J. M., 1988. Quality Control Handbook. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. Kale, V., 2016. Enhancing Enterprise Intelligence: Leveraging ERP, CRM, SCM, PLM, BPM, and BI. New York: Auerbach Publications. Kampouridis, G., Yiannopoulos, A., Giannopoulos, G. & Tsirkas, S., 2015. The relationship between TQM and financial performance of Greek companies of structural construction sector during crisis period, EAST-WEST Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XVIII 2015, No 1, 61:78. [Online] Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262010363 [Accessed 09 January 2017]. Kedar, A. et al., 2008. A Comparative Review of TQM, TPM and Related Organisational Performance Improvement Programs,First International Conference on Emerging Trends in Engineering and Technology, ICETET '08.. [Online] Available at: 10.1109/ICETET.2008.133 [Accessed 19 February 2017]. Kerzner, H., 2009. Project Management A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. 10th ed. New York: Wiley. Lagodimos, A., Chountalas, P. & Chatzi, K., 2006. The state of ISO 14001 certification in Greece. [Online] Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.06.015 [Accessed 13 February 2017]. Lakhal, L., 2014. The Relationship Between ISO 9000 Certification, TQM Practices, and Organizational Performance, QMJ VOL. 21, NO. 3, pages 38-48. [Online] Available at: http://asq.org/quality-management/2014/07/iso-9000/the-relationship-betweeniso-9000-certification-tqm-practices-and-organizational-performance.pdf [Accessed 10 January 2017]. Lazari, C. G. & Kanellopoulos, D. N., 2007. Total Quality Management in Hotel Restaurants: A Case Study in Greece, Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 2 (3):564-571. [Online] Available at: http://docsdrive.com/pdfs/medwelljournals/jeasci/2007/564-571.pdf [Accessed 28 January 2017]. Lean Enterprise Institute, Inc., 2009. Lean Transformations Getting More Emphasis in Recession. [Online] Available at: https://www.lean.org/Search/Documents/156.pdf [Accessed 20 February 2017]. Lean Enterprise Institute, Inc., 2009. Tough Times Will Separate True Lean-Thinking Companies from the Pretenders. [Online] Available at: https://www.lean.org/WhoWeAre/NewsArticleDocuments/Post_Summit09_2.pdf [Accessed 20 February 2017]. Lee, T. Y., Leung, Keith, H. K. & Chan, C., 1999. "Improving quality management on the basis of ISO 9000", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 11 Issue: 2, pp.88-94. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/09544789910257028 [Accessed 04 January 2017]. Dissertation

89

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Lipovatz, D., Stenos, . F. & Vaka, A., 1999. "Implementation of ISO 9000 quality systems in Greek enterprises", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 16 Iss 6 pp. 534 - 551. [Online] Available at: doi:10.1108/02656719910278575 [Accessed 16 January 2017]. Macpherson, G. W., Lockhart, C. J., Kavan, H. & Iaquinto, L. A., 2015. "Kaizen: a Japanese philosophy and system for business excellence", Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 36 Issue: 5, pp.3-9,. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/JBS-07-2014-0083 [Accessed 20 December 2016]. Marques, P. A., Meyrelles, P. M., Saraiva, P. M. & Frazão-Guerreiro, F. J., 2016. Integrating Lean Six Sigma with ISO 9001:2015, Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM), 2016 IEEE International Conference. [Online] Available at: 10.1109/IEEM.2016.7798006 [Accessed 20 February 2017]. Martinez-Lorente, A. R., Dewhurst, F. W. & Gallego-Rodriguez, A., 2010. Relating TQM, marketing and business performance: An exploratory study, International Journal of Production Research, Volume 38, 2000 - Issue 14, Pages 3227-3246. [Online] Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/002075400418234 [Accessed 10 January 2017]. Martínez‐Lorente, A. R. & Martínez‐Costa, M., 2004. "ISO 9000 and TQM: substitutes or complementaries?: An empirical study in industrial companies", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 21 Issue: 3, pp.260-276. [Online] Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656710410522711 [Accessed 05 January 2017]. Melidonioti, M. & Gotzamani, K., 2007. "Standardization and Quality in Greek Banking Services", MIBES (Management of International Business & Economic Systems) Transactions On Line Journal (MTOL), ISSN 1790-9899, Vol.1, No. 1, Autumn 2007, pp. 6074.. [Online] Available at: http://mibes.teilar.gr/ebook/ebooks/melidonioti-gotzamani%2077-89.pdf [Accessed 10 January 2017]. Micklewright, M., 2010. Lean ISO 9001: Adding Spark to your ISO 9001 QMS and Sustainability to your Lean Efforts. 1st edition ed. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA: ASQ Quality Press. Miller, D. & Hartwick, J., 2002. Spotting Management Fads, Harvard Business Review 80(10):26-7, 126. [Online] Available at: https://hbr.org/2002/10/spotting-management-fads [Accessed 18 January 2017]. Mishkin, F. S., 1991. Anatomy of a financial crisis, Working paper no. 3934. [Online] Available at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w3934.pdf [Accessed 12 January 2017]. Mosadeghrad, A. M., 2014. Why TQM programmes fail? A pathology approach, The TQM Journal, Vol. 26 Issue: 2, pp.160-187. [Online]

Dissertation

90

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Available at: 10.1108/TQM-12-2010-0041 [Accessed 05 January 2017]. Motwani, J., Kumar , A. & Jiang, J., 1998. Business process reengineering: A theoretical framework and an integrated model, International Journal of Operations & Production Management 18(9-10):964-977. [Online] Available at: DOI: 10.1108/EUM0000000004536 [Accessed 06 February 2017]. National Quality Infrastructure System (N.Q.I.S.), 2014. National Quality Infrastructure System (N.Q.I.S.). [Online] Available at: http://www.esyp.eu/ [Accessed 08 January 2017]. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2008. The right to Health - Fact Sheet no 31. [Online] Available at: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/Factsheet31.pdf [Accessed 7 March 2017]. Ohno, T., 1988. Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-scale Production. New York: Productivity. Palmer, V., 2001. Inventory Management Kaizen. Proceedings of 2nd International Workshop on Engineering Management for Applied Technology. [Online] Available at: 10.1109/EMAT.2001.991311 [Accessed 2017 March 10]. Pande, P. & Holpp, H., 2001. What Is Six Sigma?. 1st edition ed. McGraw-Hill Education: New York. Pande, P. S., Neuman, R. P. & Cavanagh, R. R., 2000. The Six Sigma Way: How GE, Motorola, and Other Top Companies are Honing Their Performance. 1st edition ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Education. Pelnekar, C., 2011. Planning for and Implementing ISO 27001, ISACA Journal, Volume 4. [Online] Available at: https://www.isaca.org/Journal/archives/2011/Volume-4/Documents/jpdf11v4Planning-for-and.pdf [Accessed 10 January 2017]. Pfeifer, T., Reissiger, W. & Canales, C., 2004. "Integrating six sigma with quality management systems", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 16 Issue: 4, pp.241-249. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/09544780410541891 [Accessed 20 February 2017]. Porter, M. E., 1980. Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors. 1st edition ed. New York: Free Press. Powell, T. C., 1995. “Total quality management as competitive advantage: a review and empirical study”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 15-37. [Online] Available at: http://www.thomaspowell.co.uk/article_pdfs/TQM_as_CA.pdf [Accessed 8 January 2017].

Dissertation

91

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Psomas, E., 2016. "The underlying factorial structure and significance of the Six Sigma difficulties and critical success factors: The Greek case" The TQM Journal, Vol. 28 Issue: 4, pp.530-546. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/TQM-04-2015-0049 [Accessed 20 February 2017]. Psomas, E. L. & Fotopoulos, C. V., 2010. “Total quality management practices and results in food companies”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 59 No. 7, pp. 668-687.. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/17410401011075657 [Accessed 06 February 2017]. Psomas, E. L., Fotopoulos, C. V. & Kafetzopoulos, D. P., 2010. "Critical factors for effective implementation of ISO 9001 in SME service companies", Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, Vol. 20 Issue: 5, pp.440-457. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/09604521011073731 [Accessed 03 January 2017]. Psomas, E. L., Fotopoulos, C. V. & Kafetzopoulos, D. P., 2011. "Motives,difficulties and benefits in implementing the ISO 14001 Environmental Management System",Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, Vol. 22 Issue: 4, pp.502-521. [Online] Available at: doi:10.1108/14777831111136090 [Accessed 13 February 2017]. Pyzdek, T., 2001. Why Six Sigma is not TQM, Six Sigma and Beyond, Quality Digest. [Online] Available at: https://sixsigmatraining.com/PDF/2001-02.pdf [Accessed 10 February 2017]. Pyzdek, T., 2003. The Six Sigma Handbook. 2nd edition ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. Rad, A. M. M., 2006. "The impact of organizational culture on the successful implementation of total quality management", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 18 Issue: 6, pp.606-625,. [Online] Available at: doi:10.1108/09544780610707101 [Accessed 01 February 2017]. Reinhart, C. M. & Rogoff, K. S., 2009. This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly. 1st edition ed. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Sălăgean, H. C., Bâlc, B. & Gârbacea Răzvan, D., 2014. THE EXISTING BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT, n.1, 138, pp:1234-1240. [Online] Available at: http://steconomiceuoradea.ro/anale/volume/2014/n1/138.pdf [Accessed 02 January 2017]. Salah, S., Carretero , J. A. & Rahim, A., 2010. The integration of quality management and continuous improvement methodologies with management systems, International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, volume 6, Issue 3,pp. 269-288. [Online] Available at: DOI: 10.1504/IJPQM.2010.035116 [Accessed 02 January 2017]. Salegna, G. & Fazel, F., 2000. Obstacles to Implementing Quality, QUALITY PROGRESS, VOL. 33, NO. 7, pp. 53-57. [Online]

Dissertation

92

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Available at: http://asq.org/data/subscriptions/qp/2000/0700/qp0700salegna.pdf [Accessed 02 January 2017]. Salonitis, K. & Tsinopoulos, C., 2016. Drivers and Barriers of Lean Implementation in the Greek Manufacturing Sector, 49th CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems (CIRP-CMS 2016), Procedia CIRP 57 ( 2016 ) 189 – 194. [Online] Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.11.033 [Accessed 20 February 2017]. SGS Group, 2016. What makes your occupational health and safety systems best-in-class?. [Online] Available at: www.sgs.com/-/media/global/documents/brochures/sgs-cbe-ohsas-18001brochure-a4-lr-en-16-07.pdf [Accessed 10 April 2017]. Siha, S. M. & Saad, G. H., 2008. "Business process improvement: empirical assessment and extensions", Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 14 Issue: 6, pp.778-802. [Online] Available at: doi:10.1108/14637150810915973 [Accessed 02 January 2017]. Sioutis, G. P., 2016. The Constitutional Protection Of The Environment. [Online] Available at: http://www.greeklawdigest.gr/topics/physical-cultural-environment/item/93-theconstitutional-protection-of-the-environment [Accessed February 13 2017]. Slack, N., Chambers, S. & Johnston, R., 2010. Operations Management. 6th Edition ed. New York: Prentice Hall. Spyridon Mamalis, Dimitrios P. Kafetzopoulos & ) Stamatis Aggelopoulos, 2009. The New Food Safety Standard ISO 22000. Assessment, Comparison and Correlation with HACCP and ISO 9000:2000. The Practical Implementation in Victual Business. [Online] Available at: http://ageconsearch.tind.io//bitstream/58088/2/Mamalis.pdf [Accessed 02 March 2017]. Stamatis, D., 2002. Six Sigma and Beyond: Foundations of Excellent Performance, Volume I. 1st edition ed. New York: CRC Press company. Staw, B. M. & Epstein, L. D., 2000. What Bandwagons Bring: Effects of Popular Management Techniques on Corporate Performance, Reputation, and CEO Pay. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 523-556.. [Online] Available at: doi:10.2307/2667108 [Accessed 17 January 2017]. Terziovski, M., Power, D. & Sohal, A. S., 2003. The longitudinal effects of the ISO 9000 certification process on business performance,European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 146, issue 3, pages 580-595. [Online] Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00252-7 [Accessed 09 January 2017]. The Boeing Company, 2003. Better, faster, cheaper—but most of all, better, Boeing Frontiers, Volume 02, Issue 03. [Online] Available at: http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2003/july/i_ca1.html [Accessed 20 February 2017]. Dissertation

93

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises The Hellenic Accreditation System, 2014. The Hellenic Accreditation System. [Online] Available at: http://www.esyd.gr/portal/p/esyd/en/esyd.jsp [Accessed 07 January 2017]. The ISO 27000 Directory, 2017. The ISO 27001 Certification. [Online] Available at: www.27000.org/ismsprocess.htm [Accessed 10 January 2017]. Tsiotras, G. & Gotzamani, K., 1996. ISO 9000 as an entry key to TQM: the case of Greek industry", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 13 Issue: 4, pp.6476. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/02656719610114407 [Accessed 20 January 2017]. Tsironis, L. K. & Psychogios, A. G., 2016. "Road towards Lean Six Sigma in service industry: a multi-factor integrated framework", Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 22 Issue: 4, pp.812-834,. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/BPMJ-08-2015-0118 [Accessed 20 February 2017]. Tummala, V. R. & Tang, C., 1996. "Strategic quality management, Malcolm Baldrige and European quality awards and ISO 9000 certification: Core concepts and comparative analysis", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management,Vol. 13 Issue: 4, pp.838. [Online] Available at: doi: 10.1108/02656719610114371 [Accessed 10 January 2017]. Varoufakis, G., 1999. “Ancient Greek Standards- The History and Control of the Materials which left their Mark on Greek Civilisation”. 1st edition ed. Athens: Aeolos. Vouzas, F., Psychogios, A. & Tsironis, L., 2013. The Road towards Lean Six Sigma: Sustainable Success Factors in Service Industry, Nang Yan Business Journal – 2.1,Paper #: 04, 31-38. [Online] Available at: http://www.ny.edu.hk/web/cht/nang_yan_business_journal/Nang%20Yan%20Business%20Jo urnal/vol2.1a/04-GreeceFotis%20et.al%20~%20The%20Road%20towards%20Lean%20Six%20Sigma.pdf [Accessed 20 February 2017]. Watkins, S. G., 2013. An Introduction to Information Security and ISO 27001 A Pocket Guide, Second Edition. [Online] Available at: https://www.itgovernance.co.uk/shop/product/an-introduction-to-informationsecurity-and-iso-27001-2013-a-pocket-guide-second-edition [Accessed 10 January 2017]. Westcott, R. T., 2006. The Certified Manager of Quality/Organizational Excellence Handbook. 3rd edition ed. Milwaukee, Wisconsin: ASQ Quality Press. Womack, J., 2009. Lean Thinking was Forged in Similar Economic Times, Supply Chain Digest. [Online] Available at: http://www.scdigest.com/assets/newsviews/09-04-14-2.pdf [Accessed 20 February 2017].

Dissertation

94

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Womack, J. P. & Jones, D. T., 2003. Lean thinking: Banish Waste and create Wealth in your corporation. 2nd edition ed. New York: Free Press. World Economic Forum, 2017. The Global Competitiveness Report 2016-2017. [Online] Available at: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GCR20162017/05FullReport/TheGlobalCompetitivenessReport2016-2017_FINAL.pdf [Accessed 10 April 2017]. Zhu, Z., 1999. A comparison of quality programmes: Total quality management and ISO 9000,Total Quality Management, 10:2, 291-297. [Online] Available at: doi:10.1080/0954412998018 [Accessed 02 January 2017]. Zu, X., Robbins, T. L. & Fredendall, L. D., 2010. Mapping the critical links between organizational culture and TQM/Six Sigma practices, International Journal of Production Economics, Volume 123, Issue 1, Pages 86–106. [Online] Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2009.07.009 [Accessed 01 February 2017].

Dissertation

95


APPENDIX A - SURVEY PILOT SURVEY The impact of the economic crisis on Quality Management of Greek companies Dear Participant, I invite you to participate in a research study entitled: The impact of the economic crisis on Quality Management of Greek companies. I am currently enrolled in the Master’s Degree Program In Business Administration at the School Of Social Sciences, of Hellenic Open University and am in the process of writing my Master’s Thesis. The purpose of the research is to explore the Quality Management System application in Greek organizations during recession period. Investigate about the Quality Improvement programs and methodologies in Greek enterprises as a strategy during economic crisis. Your participation in this research project is completely voluntary. You may decline altogether, or leave blank any questions you don’t wish to answer. There are no known risks to participation beyond those encountered in everyday life. Your responses will remain confidential and anonymous. Data from this research will be kept under lock and key and reported only as a collective combined total. No one other than the researchers will know your individual answers to this questionnaire. If you agree to participate in this project, please answer the questions on the questionnaire as best you can. It should take approximately 15 min to complete. If you have any questions about this project, feel free to contact me at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance in this important endeavor. Sincerely yours, Victoria Tsolidou

Dissertation

96


Dissertation

97


Dissertation

98


Dissertation

99


Dissertation

100


Dissertation

101


Dissertation

102


Dissertation

103

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises FINAL SURVEY

Η επίδραση της οικονομικής κρίσης στα Συστήματα Διαχείρισης Ποιότητας των Ελληνικών επιχειρήσεων

Αγαπητέ Κύριε/ Κυρία,

Με αφορμή μια έρευνα με θέμα τηv «Επίδραση της οικονομικής κρίσης στα Συστήματα Διαχείρισης Ποιότητας των Ελληνικών επιχειρήσεων» που γίνεται στα πλαίσια του μεταπτυχιακού προγράμματος Διοίκησης Επιχειρήσεων (ΜΒΑ) της Σχολής Κοινωνικών Επιστημών του Ελληνικού Ανοικτού Πανεπιστημίου, σας αποστέλλουμε το παρακάτω ερωτηματολόγιο. Η έρευνα γίνεται από τη μεταπτυχιακή φοιτήτρια Τσολίδου Βικτώρια, για την απόκτηση μεταπτυχιακού διπλώματος, με επιβλέποντα καθηγητή του προγράμματος Διοίκησης Επιχειρήσεων MBA, του Προγράμματος Μεταπτυχιακών Σπουδών της Σχολής Κοινωνικών Επιστημών του Ελληνικού Ανοικτού Πανεπιστημίου.

Σκοπός της έρευνας είναι ο αντίκτυπος της κρίσης στην διαχείριση και διατήρηση των Συστημάτων Διαχείρισης Ποιότητας και άλλων μοντέλων Στρατηγικής Διοίκησης Ποιότητας καθώς και στην ευρύτερη αντιμετώπιση της ποιότητας εν καιρώ κρίσης.

Οι πληροφορίες που θα δώσετε είναι αυστηρά εμπιστευτικές και μόνο στατιστικά σύνολα θα χρησιμοποιηθούν στη μελέτη. Θα διατηρηθεί η ανωνυμία και το απόρρητο των πληροφοριών.

Dissertation

104


Dissertation

105


Dissertation

106


Dissertation

107


Dissertation

108


Dissertation

109


Dissertation

110


Dissertation

111


Dissertation

112


Dissertation

113


APPENDIX B – DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS DEMOGRAPHIC INFO

Figure 0-1 Statistical Classification by Activity

$Classification Frequencies Frequency table Responses N $Classificationa

ACCOMMODATION AND

Percent of

Percent

Cases

26

5.9%

5.9%

18

4.1%

4.1%

5

1.1%

1.1%

34

7.7%

7.7%

13

3.0%

3.0%

FOOD SERVICES ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPPORT SERVICES ARTS, ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION SERVICES CONSTRUCTIONS AND CONSTRUCTION WORKS EDUCATION SERVICES

Dissertation

114


ELECTRICITY, GAS,

7

1.6%

1.6%

9

2.1%

2.1%

26

5.9%

5.9%

7

1.6%

1.6%

82

18.7%

18.7%

1

0.2%

0.2%

OTHER SERVICES

59

13.4%

13.4%

PRODUCTS OF

14

3.2%

3.2%

63

14.4%

14.4%

7

1.6%

1.6%

REAL ESTATE SERVICES

4

0.9%

0.9%

TRANSPORTATION AND

20

4.6%

4.6%

4

0.9%

0.9%

40

9.1%

9.1%

439

100.0%

100.0%

STEAM AND AIR CONDITIONING FINANCIAL AND INSURANCE SERVICES HUMAN HEALTH AND SOCIAL WORK SERVICES INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION SERVICES MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS MINING AND QUARRYING

AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND FISHING PROFESSIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL SERVICES PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND DEFENCE SERVICES; COMPULSORY SOCIAL SECURITY SERVICES

STORAGE SERVICES WATER SUPPLY; SEWERAGE, WASTE MANAGEMENT AND REMEDIATION SERVICES WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE SERVICES; REPAIR SERVICES OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND MOTORCYCLES Total a. Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1.

Dissertation

115


Figure 0-2 Administrative Region

Region Frequency table Cumulative Frequency Valid

Eastern Macedonia and

Percent

Valid Percent

Percent

13

3.0

3.0

3.0

191

43.5

43.5

46.5

Northen Aegean

8

1.8

1.8

48.3

Western Greece

13

3.0

3.0

51.3

Western Macedonia

12

2.7

2.7

54.0

6

1.4

1.4

55.4

16

3.6

3.6

59.0

8

1.8

1.8

60.8

116

26.4

26.4

87.2

16

3.6

3.6

90.9

9

2.1

2.1

92.9

Peloponnese

11

2.5

2.5

95.4

Central Greece

20

4.6

4.6

100.0

439

100.0

100.0

Thrace Attica

Epirus Thessaly Ionian Islands Central Macedonia Crete Southern Aegean

Total

Dissertation

116


Figure 0-3 Company age

Company Age Frequency table Cumulative Frequency Valid

1-3 Years

Percent

Valid Percent

Percent

19

4.3

4.3

4.3

10-20 Years

122

27.8

27.8

32.1

20+ Years

241

54.9

54.9

87.0

4-5 Years

18

4.1

4.1

91.1

6-9 Years

37

8.4

8.4

99.5

2

.5

.5

100.0

439

100.0

100.0

Less than a Year Total

Dissertation

117


Figure 0-4 Enterprise size according to persons employed

Employees Company size Frequency table Cumulative Frequency Valid

10-45 persons

Percent

Valid Percent

Percent

136

31.0

31.0

31.0

100 - 250 persons

49

11.2

11.2

42.1

250+

48

10.9

10.9

53.1

50-100 persons

43

9.8

9.8

62.9

6-9 persons

83

18.9

18.9

81.8

till 5 persons

80

18.2

18.2

100.0

439

100.0

100.0

Total

Dissertation

118


Figure 0-5 Job title

Jobtitle Frequency table Cumulative Frequency Valid

General Manager

Percent

Valid Percent

Percent

1

.2

.2

.2

33

7.5

7.5

7.7

115

26.2

26.2

33.9

Production manager

12

2.7

2.7

36.7

Quality manager

68

15.5

15.5

52.2

Quality supervisor

69

15.7

15.7

67.9

Προιστάμενος Προμηθειών

1

.2

.2

68.1

Προϊστάμενος Συντήρησης

1

.2

.2

68.3

Quality responsible

139

31.7

31.7

100.0

Total

439

100.0

100.0

Other General Manager

Dissertation

119


PART A

Figure 0-1 Which QMS do you use?

Figure 0-2 Years since first certification

Dissertation

120


Figure 0-3 Reasons / motives of implementing QMS

Figure 0-4 Perceived benefits from QMS and overall satisfaction rate

Dissertation

121


Figure 0-5 Overall satisfaction regarding implementation of QMS

Figure 0-6 Motives vs Perceived value QMS

Dissertation

122


PART B

Figure 0-1 Impact of economic recession to the issuance and maintenance of QMS certificates in Greece

Figure 0-2 Impact of economic recession to quality of products and/or services

Dissertation

123


Figure 0-3 Business strategy selection during economic turndown

Figure 0-4 Status of QMS certificates during recession

Dissertation

124


Figure 0-5 QMS certifications in 2020

Figure 0-6 Challenges to renew or issue QMS certificate during Economic Recession

Dissertation

125


PART C

Figure 0-1 Which QI program do you use?

Dissertation

126


Figure 0-2 Overall satisfaction from the implementation of QI programs

Figure 0-3 How many years do you use the QI programs

Dissertation

127


Figure 0-4 Reasons/ motives for Implementation QI programs

Figure 0-5 Impact of Economic recession to QI programs

Dissertation

128


Figure 0-6 Challenges during implementation of QI programs

APPENDIX C - STATISTICAL TESTS POWER AND SAMPLE SIZE Πίνακας 0-1 Power and sample size

Before the data collection χ² tests - Variance: Difference from constant (one sample case) Analysis: Input:

A priori: Compute required sample size

Tail(s)

= One

Ratio var1/var0

= 1.5

Power (1-β err prob)

= 0.9990203

α err prob Output:

Lower critical χ²

Upper critical χ² Df

Total sample size

Dissertation

= 0.05

= 326.443

= 326.443 = 286

= 287

129

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Actual power

= 0.9990203

Considering our sample QMS: χ² tests - Variance: Difference from constant (one sample case) Analysis: Input:

Post hoc: Compute achieved power

Tail(s)

Ratio var1/var0 α err prob

Total sample size Output:

Lower critical χ²

= One

= 1.5

= 0.05

= 439

= 487.7935

Upper critical χ²

= 487.7935


= 0.9999851

Df

= 438

Considering our sample QI: χ² tests - Variance: Difference from constant (one sample case) Analysis: Input:

Post hoc: Compute achieved power

Tail(s)

= One

Ratio var1/var0

= 1.5

Total sample size

= 287

Upper critical χ²

= 326.443

α err prob Output:

Lower critical χ² Df


Dissertation

= 0.05 = 326.443

= 286

= 0.9990203

130


QUESTIONNAIRE RELIABILITY ANALYSIS - Cronbach's alpha Question 8 QMS motives

Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Cronbach's

Standardized

Alpha

Items .857

Dissertation

N of Items .862

10

131

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Item Statistics Mean Motives_Competition and

Std. Deviation

N

3.92

1.017

439

4.08

.899

439

3.95

.954

439

3.98

1.040

439

3.57

1.313

439

3.88

1.073

439

3.64

1.127

439

4.02

.988

439

3.70

1.073

439

3.81

1.031

439

customer requirements Motives_Improving the organisation's public image Motives_Increase customer satisfaction Motives_Demand and/or pressure from customers / suppliers who want it Motives_Conformance with regulation (when applicable) Motives_Improving product and/or service quality Motives_Improving productivity and/or efficiency and increase of sales Motives_Improving process and procedures Motives_Improving Staff performance Motives_Internal change of culture

Dissertation

132


Inter-Item Correlation Matrix Motiv

Motives_D

Motives_

es_In

emand

Conform

creas

and/or

ance

Motives_

Motives_I

oving

Improvin

Motives_

Motives_I

Competiti

mproving

e

pressure

with

mproving

productivity

g

Motives_I

on and

the

custo

from

regulatio

product

and/or

process

mproving

customer

organisati

mer

customers /

n (when

and/or

efficiency and

and

Staff

suppliers

applicabl

service

increase of

procedur

e)

quality

sales

es

requirem on's public satisf ents Motives_Competition and customer

Motives_Impr

image

action who want it

Motives_Inter

performan nal change of ce

culture

1.000

.442

.403

.441

.180

.270

.247

.224

.253

.241

.442

1.000

.474

.441

.240

.368

.286

.327

.332

.343

Motives_Increase customer satisfaction

.403

.474

1.000

.339

.240

.516

.566

.483

.490

.377

Motives_Demand and/or pressure from

.441

.441

.339

1.000

.273

.207

.222

.178

.222

.188

.180

.240

.240

.273

1.000

.392

.276

.261

.324

.335

.270

.368

.516

.207

.392

1.000

.649

.605

.539

.498

.247

.286

.566

.222

.276

.649

1.000

.543

.567

.406

requirements Motives_Improving the organisation's public image

customers / suppliers who want it Motives_Conformance with regulation (when applicable) Motives_Improving product and/or service quality Motives_Improving productivity and/or efficiency and increase of sales

Dissertation

133


Motives_Improving process and

.224

.327

.483

.178

.261

.605

.543

1.000

.701

.629

Motives_Improving Staff performance

.253

.332

.490

.222

.324

.539

.567

.701

1.000

.742

Motives_Internal change of culture

.241

.343

.377

.188

.335

.498

.406

.629

.742

1.000

procedures

Item-Total Statistics

Motives_Competition and

Squared

Cronbach's

Scale Mean if

Scale Variance

Corrected Item-

Multiple

Alpha if Item

Item Deleted

if Item Deleted

Total Correlation

Correlation

Deleted

34.64

42.226

.428

.304

.855

34.48

41.962

.529

.377

.847

34.62

40.219

.644

.483

.838

34.58

42.418

.401

.304

.857

34.99

40.388

.408

.219

.862

customer requirements Motives_Improving the organisation's public image Motives_Increase customer satisfaction Motives_Demand and/or pressure from customers / suppliers who want it Motives_Conformance with regulation (when applicable)

Dissertation

134


Motives_Improving product

34.68

38.665

.683

.567

.833

34.92

38.861

.626

.542

.838

34.54

39.705

.662

.589

.836

34.86

38.435

.702

.682

.832

34.75

39.708

.628

.599

.839

and/or service quality Motives_Improving productivity and/or efficiency and increase of sales Motives_Improving process and procedures Motives_Improving Staff performance Motives_Internal change of culture

Scale Statistics Mean 38.56

Dissertation

Variance 48.927

Std. Deviation 6.995

N of Items 10

135


QUESTION 9 QMS BENEFITS

Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Cronbach's

Standardized

Alpha

Items .950

N of Items .952

11

Item Statistics Mean Benefits_Competition and

Std. Deviation

N

3.43

1.062

439

3.57

1.057

439

3.51

1.077

439

3.51

1.162

439

customer requirements Benefits_Improving the organisation's public image Benefits_Increase customer satisfaction Benefits_Demand and/or pressure from customers / suppliers who want it

Dissertation

136


Benefits_Conformance with

3.42

1.274

439

3.44

1.129

439

3.17

1.101

439

3.51

1.102

439

3.27

1.101

439

3.28

1.108

439

3.49

1.027

439

regulation (when applicable) Benefits_Improving product and/or service quality Benefits_Improving productivity and/or efficiency and increase of sales Benefits_Improving process and procedures Benefits_Improving Staff performance Benefits_Internal change of culture Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS?

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix

Dissertation

137

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Benefits_ Benefits Benefits_C _Improv

Benefits_Competition and

Demand

Benefits_

Benefits_I

Benefits_Wh

and/or

Conform

mproving

Benefits_

at is your

pressure

ance

Benefits_I

productivity

Improvin

overall

ompetition

ing the

from

with

mproving

and/or

g

Benefits_

and

organis

customers

regulatio

product

efficiency

process

Improvin

Benefits_I

satisfaction regarding

customer

ation's

Benefits_Incre

/ suppliers

n (when

and/or

and

and

g Staff

nternal

the

requiremen

public

ase customer

who want

applicabl

service

increase of

procedur

performa

ts

image

satisfaction

it

e)

quality

sales

es

nce

change of implementati culture

on of QMS?

1.000

.781

.749

.694

.484

.555

.610

.562

.570

.519

.623

.781

1.000

.786

.656

.566

.629

.597

.637

.631

.615

.737

.749

.786

1.000

.662

.537

.694

.645

.667

.682

.643

.729

.694

.656

.662

1.000

.480

.549

.537

.500

.509

.478

.627

.484

.566

.537

.480

1.000

.561

.461

.541

.552

.498

.598

.555

.629

.694

.549

.561

1.000

.741

.738

.758

.713

.731

customer requirements Benefits_Improving the organisation's public image Benefits_Increase customer satisfaction Benefits_Demand and/or pressure from customers / suppliers who want it Benefits_Conformance with regulation (when applicable) Benefits_Improving product and/or service quality

Dissertation

138


Benefits_Improving productivity

.610

.597

.645

.537

.461

.741

1.000

.620

.750

.634

.686

.562

.637

.667

.500

.541

.738

.620

1.000

.815

.779

.773

.570

.631

.682

.509

.552

.758

.750

.815

1.000

.838

.801

.519

.615

.643

.478

.498

.713

.634

.779

.838

1.000

.769

.623

.737

.729

.627

.598

.731

.686

.773

.801

.769

1.000

and/or efficiency and increase of sales Benefits_Improving process and procedures Benefits_Improving Staff performance Benefits_Internal change of culture Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS?


Benefits_Competition and

Squared

Cronbach's

Scale Mean if

Scale Variance

Corrected Item-

Multiple

Alpha if Item

Item Deleted

if Item Deleted

Total Correlation

Correlation

Deleted

34.15

84.139

.743

.710

.947

34.02

83.054

.808

.748

.944

34.08

82.389

.828

.734

.944

customer requirements Benefits_Improving the organisation's public image Benefits_Increase customer satisfaction

Dissertation

139


Benefits_Demand and/or

34.08

83.859

.683

.569

.949

34.16

83.439

.631

.427

.952

34.15

81.859

.813

.718

.944

34.42

83.253

.760

.675

.946

34.07

82.376

.808

.742

.944

34.31

81.717

.844

.829

.943

34.31

82.653

.787

.749

.945

34.10

82.504

.868

.779

.943

pressure from customers / suppliers who want it Benefits_Conformance with regulation (when applicable) Benefits_Improving product and/or service quality Benefits_Improving productivity and/or efficiency and increase of sales Benefits_Improving process and procedures Benefits_Improving Staff performance Benefits_Internal change of culture Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS?


Dissertation

Variance 99.741


N of Items 11

140


Question 19 QI programs motives Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Cronbach's

Standardized

Alpha

Items .959

N of Items .959

12

Item Statistics Mean

Std. Deviation

N

Management Change

2.69

1.485

439

Loss of market share

2.52

1.385

439

Competitition - Other

2.74

1.400

439

Unhappy customers

2.52

1.439

439

Timely delivery of the

2.90

1.474

439

companies using similar strategies

product or service

Dissertation

141


Provision of high quality

3.30

1.466

439

3.11

1.411

439

3.13

1.425

439

3.09

1.413

439

3.13

1.409

439

Pressure to reduce costs

3.00

1.470

439

Merge with another business

2.09

1.402

439

products and services Possibility of exploiting significant market opportunities Possible benchmarking with other businesses / organizations Forecasting customer trends and wishes Comply with technological developments and changes

or sector

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix Provisio Possibility Competititio

Dissertation

Possible

Comply

n of

of

benchmarki

Forecasti

with

Merge

high

exploiting

ng with

ng

technologi

with another

n - Other

Unhapp

Timely

quality

significant

other

customer

cal

market

businesses /

trends

developm

Pressure

busines

and

ents and

to reduce

s or

wishes

changes

costs

sector

Managem

Loss of

companies

y

delivery of

product

ent

market

using similar

custom

the product

s and

Change

share

strategies

ers

or service

services

142

opportuniti organization es

s


Management Change

1.000

.765

.692

.739

.643

.590

.565

.562

.580

.588

.668

.539


.765

1.000

.773

.826

.716

.578

.615

.572

.586

.563

.731

.625

Competitition - Other companies

.692

.773

1.000

.726

.708

.663

.677

.705

.667

.651

.676

.518

Unhappy customers

.739

.826

.726

1.000

.790

.605

.608

.569

.586

.574

.717

.632

Timely delivery of the product or

.643

.716

.708

.790

1.000

.773

.726

.623

.713

.683

.743

.510

.590

.578

.663

.605

.773

1.000

.840

.779

.782

.805

.701

.390

.565

.615

.677

.608

.726

.840

1.000

.830

.798

.798

.704

.439

.562

.572

.705

.569

.623

.779

.830

1.000

.767

.791

.666

.411

.580

.586

.667

.586

.713

.782

.798

.767

1.000

.852

.704

.438

.588

.563

.651

.574

.683

.805

.798

.791

.852

1.000

.703

.459

Pressure to reduce costs

.668

.731

.676

.717

.743

.701

.704

.666

.704

.703

1.000

.547

Merge with another business or

.539

.625

.518

.632

.510

.390

.439

.411

.438

.459

.547

1.000

using similar strategies

service Provision of high quality products and services Possibility of exploiting significant market opportunities Possible benchmarking with other businesses / organizations Forecasting customer trends and wishes Comply with technological developments and changes

sector


Dissertation

143

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Squared

Cronbach's

Scale Mean if

Scale Variance

Corrected Item-

Multiple

Alpha if Item

Item Deleted

if Item Deleted

Total Correlation

Correlation

Deleted

Management Change

31.51

171.716

.755

.657

.956


31.68

172.116

.805

.794

.955

Competitition - Other

31.46

171.381

.817

.720

.955

Unhappy customers

31.68

170.830

.808

.792

.955

Timely delivery of the product

31.31

168.993

.838

.788

.954

30.90

169.689

.823

.807

.954

31.09

170.547

.835

.811

.954

31.07

171.579

.795

.775

.955

31.11

171.005

.819

.783

.955

31.08

171.106

.819

.802

.955

31.20

169.369

.830

.702

.954

companies using similar strategies

or service Provision of high quality products and services Possibility of exploiting significant market opportunities Possible benchmarking with other businesses / organizations Forecasting customer trends and wishes Comply with technological developments and changes Pressure to reduce costs

Dissertation

144


Merge with another business

32.11

179.159

.590

.457

or sector


Dissertation

Variance 203.288


N of Items 12

145

.961


CROSS TABULATION ANALYSIS Only significant tables are presented

1. Relationship of QMS overall benefit Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? * Classification

Dissertation

146


Dissertation

147


Chi-Square Tests Asymptotic Significance (2Value

df

sided)

Pearson Chi-Square

93.430a

72

.046

Likelihood Ratio

110.627

72

.002

N of Valid Cases

439

a. 67 cells (70.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .05.

Dissertation

148


Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? * Region


Dissertation

df

sided)

149


Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio

84.390a

48

.001

92.192

48

.000

N of Valid Cases

439


Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? * Age

Crosstab Age

Total

20+ 10-20 1-3 Years Benefit strongly

Count

s_Wha disagree

% within Benefits_What

t is

is your overall

your

satisfaction regarding

overall

the implementation of

satisfa

QMS?

ction

% within Age

Years

% of Total

disagree

n of QMS?

Count % within Benefits_What

s

s

Less

Ye

than a

ars

Year

4

9

1

5.0%

20.0%

45.0 %

3.7

5.6

%

%

8%

2.1

0.2

0.9

%

%

%

5.3%

3.3%

0.2%

0.9%

implem entatio

Year Year

6-9

1

regardi ng the

4-5

4

1

20

5.0

20.

5.0%

100.0%

%

0%

10. 50.0%

4.6%

0.2%

4.6%

1

19

24

0

6

0

50

2.0%

38.0%

48.0

0.0

12.

0.0%

100.0%

%

%

0%

10.0

0.0

16.

0.0%

11.4%

%

%

2%

5.5

0.0

1.4

0.0%

11.4%

%

%

%

62

5

10

0

131

is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within Age

% of Total

Count

Dissertation

5.3%

0.2%

8

15.6%

4.3%

46

150


undecide % within Benefits_What d

6.1%

35.1%

is your overall

47.3

3.8

7.6

%

%

%

25.7

27.8

27.

%

%

0%

14.1

1.1

2.3

%

%

%

0.0%

100.0%

0.0%

29.8%

0.0%

29.8%

satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within Age

% of Total

agree


42.1%

1.8%

37.7%

10.5%

6

38

109

9

9

1

172

3.5%

22.1%

63.4

5.2

5.2

0.6%

100.0%

%

%

%

45.2

50.0

24. 50.0%

39.2%

%

%

3%

24.8

2.1

2.1

%

%

%


% of Total

strongly

Count

agree

% within Benefits_What

31.6%

1.4%

31.1%

8.7%

0.2%

39.2%

8

0

66

0.0%

100.0%

0.0%

15.0%

0.0%

15.0%

3

15

37

3

4.5%

22.7%

56.1

4.5

12.

%

%

1%

15.4

16.7

21.

%

%

6%

8.4

0.7

1.8

%

%

%


% of Total

Total


15.8%

0.7%

12.3%

3.4%

19

122

241

18

37

2

439

4.3%

27.8%

54.9

4.1

8.4

0.5%

100.0%

%

%

%

100.0

100.0%


100.0% 100.0%

100. 0%

100. 100 0%

.0

%

% % of Total

Dissertation

4.3%

27.8%

54.9

4.1

8.4

%

%

%

0.5%

151

100.0%


Chi-Square Tests Asymptotic Significance (2Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio

df

sided)

33.895a

20

.027

30.068

20

.069

N of Valid Cases

439


Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? * Employees

Crosstab Employees

Benefits_ strongly

Count

What is

% within Benefits_What is your

disagree

Total

100 -

50-

10-45

250

100

person

perso

s

ns

6-9

till 5

perso perso person 250+

ns

ns

s

5

0

0

0

7

8

20

25.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

35.0

40.0%

100.0

your

overall satisfaction regarding the

overall

implementation of QMS?

satisfacti

% within Employees

3.7%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

8.4%

10.0%

4.6%

on

% of Total

1.1%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.6%

1.8%

4.6%

regarding disagree the

Count

16

2

2

6

14

10

50

32.0%

4.0%

4.0%

12.0

28.0

20.0%

100.0

%

%

14.0

16.9

%

%

impleme ntation of QMS?

% within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the

%

%

implementation of QMS? % within Employees

% of Total Count

Dissertation

%

11.8%

4.1%

4.2%

12.5%

11.4%

3.6%

0.5%

0.5%

1.4%

3.2%

2.3%

11.4%

48

11

9

8

27

28

131

152


undecide % within Benefits_What is your d

36.6%

8.4%

6.9%

6.1%


20.6

21.4%

%

100.0 %


35.3%

% of Total agree

Count % within Benefits_What is your

22.4

18.8

18.6

32.5

35.0%

29.8%

%

%

%

%

10.9%

2.5%

2.1%

1.8%

6.2%

6.4%

29.8%

50

25

25

21

25

26

172

29.1%

14.5 %

14.5

12.2

14.5

15.1%

100.0

%

%

%

51.0

52.1

48.8

30.1

%

%

%

%

11.4%

5.7%

5.7%

4.8%

17

11

12

25.8%

16.7


%


36.8%

% of Total strongly

Count

agree


32.5%

39.2%

5.7%

5.9%

39.2%

8

10

8

66

18.2

12.1

15.2

12.1%

100.0

%

%

%

%

22.4

25.0

18.6

12.0

%

%

%

%

3.9%

2.5%

2.7%

1.8%

136

49

48

31.0%

11.2

10.9

%

%

%

100.0 100.0

100.0 100.0


%


12.5%

% of Total Total

Count % within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the

10.0%

15.0%

2.3%

1.8%

15.0%

43

83

80

439

9.8%

18.9

18.2%

100.0 %


100.0%

% of Total

31.0%

%

%

%

%

%

11.2

10.9

9.8%

18.9

18.2%

100.0

%

%

%

Asymptotic Significance (2-

Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio N of Valid Cases

df

sided)

43.971a

20

.002

49.444

20

.000

439

a. 6 cells (20.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.96.

Dissertation

100.0

%

Chi-Square Tests

Value

100.0

153

%


Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? * ISO 14001

Crosstab ISO 14001 NO Benefits_What is

strongly disagree

Count

YES

Total

19

1

20

95.0%

5.0%

100.0%

your overall

% within Benefits_What is

satisfaction

your overall satisfaction

regarding the

regarding the implementation

implementation of

of QMS?

QMS?

% within ISO 14001

5.8%

0.9%

4.6%

% of Total

4.3%

0.2%

4.6%

42

8

50

84.0%

16.0%

100.0%

12.9%

7.1%

11.4%

9.6%

1.8%

11.4%

100

31

131

76.3%

23.7%

100.0%

% within ISO 14001

30.7%

27.4%

29.8%

% of Total

22.8%

7.1%

29.8%

122

50

172

70.9%

29.1%

100.0%

% within ISO 14001

37.4%

44.2%

39.2%

% of Total

27.8%

11.4%

39.2%

43

23

66

disagree

Count % within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within ISO 14001 % of Total

undecided

Count % within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS?

agree


strongly agree

Dissertation

Count

154



65.2%

34.8%

100.0%

13.2%

20.4%

15.0%

9.8%

5.2%

15.0%

326

113

439

74.3%

25.7%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

74.3%

25.7%

100.0%

your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within ISO 14001 % of Total Total

Count % within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within ISO 14001 % of Total


df

sided)

11.140a

4

.025

Likelihood Ratio

12.783

4

.012

Linear-by-Linear Association

10.806

1

.001

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

439


Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? * MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS

Crosstab MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS NO strongly disagree

Dissertation

Count

Total

YES 20

0

155

20


Benefits_What is your


overall satisfaction


regarding the

regarding the


implementation of QMS? % within

100.0%

0.0%

100.0%

5.6%

0.0%

4.6%

4.6%

0.0%

4.6%

44

6

50

88.0%

12.0%

100.0%

12.3%

7.3%

11.4%

10.0%

1.4%

11.4%

114

17

131

87.0%

13.0%

100.0%

31.9%

20.7%

29.8%

26.0%

3.9%

29.8%

135

37

172

78.5%

21.5%

100.0%

37.8%

45.1%

39.2%

30.8%

8.4%

39.2%

44

22

66

66.7%

33.3%

100.0%

MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS % of Total disagree

Count % within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS % of Total

undecided


agree


strongly agree


Dissertation

156


% within

12.3%

26.8%

15.0%

10.0%

5.0%

15.0%

357

82

439

81.3%

18.7%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

81.3%

18.7%

100.0%

MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS % of Total Total



df

sided)

a

4

.001

Likelihood Ratio

21.848

4

.000


17.455

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

19.106

N of Valid Cases

439


Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? * WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE SERVICES; REPAIR SERVICES OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND MOTORCYCLES

Crosstab WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE SERVICES; REPAIR SERVICES OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND MOTORCYCLES NO Count

Dissertation

YES

Total

14

6

157

20


Benefits_What is your overall


satisfaction regarding the



regarding the implementation

70.0%

30.0%

100.0%

3.5%

15.0%

4.6%

3.2%

1.4%

4.6%

44

6

50

88.0%

12.0%

100.0%

11.0%

15.0%

11.4%

10.0%

1.4%

11.4%

119

12

131

90.8%

9.2%

100.0%

29.8%

30.0%

29.8%

27.1%

2.7%

29.8%

159

13

172

of QMS? % within WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE SERVICES; REPAIR SERVICES OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND MOTORCYCLES % of Total

Count % within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE SERVICES; REPAIR SERVICES OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND MOTORCYCLES % of Total Count % within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE SERVICES; REPAIR SERVICES OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND MOTORCYCLES % of Total Count

Dissertation

158



92.4%

7.6%

100.0%

39.8%

32.5%

39.2%

36.2%

3.0%

39.2%

63

3

66

95.5%

4.5%

100.0%

15.8%

7.5%

15.0%

14.4%

0.7%

15.0%

your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE SERVICES; REPAIR SERVICES OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND MOTORCYCLES % of Total Count % within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE SERVICES; REPAIR SERVICES OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND MOTORCYCLES % of Total

Total

Count % within Benefits_What is

399

40

439

90.9%

9.1%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

90.9%

9.1%

100.0%

your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE SERVICES; REPAIR SERVICES OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND MOTORCYCLES % of Total


Dissertation

df

sided)

159


13.204a

4

.010

Likelihood Ratio

9.984

4

.041


8.930

1

.003

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

439


Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? * Attica

Crosstab Attica NO Benefits_What is your

strongly disagree

Count

YES

Total

17

3

20

85.0%

15.0%

100.0%

% within Attica

6.9%

1.6%

4.6%

% of Total

3.9%

0.7%

4.6%

32

18

50

64.0%

36.0%

100.0%

12.9%

9.4%

11.4%

7.3%

4.1%

11.4%

84

47

131

64.1%

35.9%

100.0%

% within Attica

33.9%

24.6%

29.8%

% of Total

19.1%

10.7%

29.8%

76

96

172

overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS?

% within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS?

disagree

Count % within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within Attica % of Total

undecided


agree

Dissertation

Count

160



44.2%

55.8%

100.0%

% within Attica

30.6%

50.3%

39.2%

% of Total

17.3%

21.9%

39.2%

39

27

66

59.1%

40.9%

100.0%

15.7%

14.1%

15.0%

8.9%

6.2%

15.0%

248

191

439

56.5%

43.5%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

56.5%

43.5%

100.0%

your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS?

strongly agree


Total


Chi-Square Tests Asymptotic Significance (2Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases

df

sided)

21.642a

4

.000

22.487

4

.000

9.513

1

.002

439


Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? * Eastern Macedonia and Thrace

Crosstab

Dissertation

161

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Eastern Macedonia and Thrace NO Benefits_What is your overall

stron

Count


gly

% within


disagr Benefits_What is ee

YES

Total

19

1

20

95.0%

5.0%

100.0%

4.5%

7.7%

4.6%

4.3%

0.2%

4.6%

46

4

50

92.0%

8.0%

100.0%

10.8%

30.8%

11.4%

10.5%

0.9%

11.4%

124

7

131

94.7%

5.3%

100.0%

29.1%

53.8%

29.8%

28.2%

1.6%

29.8%

171

1

172

your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within Eastern Macedonia and Thrace % of Total

disagr Count ee

% within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within Eastern Macedonia and Thrace % of Total

undec Count ided

% within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within Eastern Macedonia and Thrace % of Total

agree Count

Dissertation

162


% within

99.4%

0.6%

100.0%

40.1%

7.7%

39.2%

39.0%

0.2%

39.2%

66

0

66

100.0%

0.0%

100.0%

15.5%

0.0%

15.0%

15.0%

0.0%

15.0%

426

13

439

97.0%

3.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

97.0%

3.0%

100.0%

Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within Eastern Macedonia and Thrace % of Total stron

Count

gly

% within

agree Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within Eastern Macedonia and Thrace % of Total Total

Count % within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within Eastern Macedonia and Thrace % of Total

Chi-Square Tests

Dissertation

163

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Asymptotic Significance (2Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases

df

sided)

12.698a

4

.013

14.384

4

.006

9.666

1

.002

439


Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? * Central Macedonia

Crosstab Central Macedonia NO Benefits_What is your overall strongly disagree

Count





YES

Total

8

12

20

40.0%

60.0%

100.0%

% within Central Macedonia

2.5%

10.3%

4.6%

% of Total

1.8%

2.7%

4.6%

33

17

50

66.0%

34.0%

100.0%

10.2%

14.7%

11.4%

7.5%

3.9%

11.4%

87

44

131

66.4%

33.6%

100.0%


26.9%

37.9%

29.8%

% of Total

19.8%

10.0%

29.8%

regarding the implementation of QMS?

disagree

Count % within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within Central Macedonia % of Total

undecided


Dissertation

164


agree

Count

142

30

172

82.6%

17.4%

100.0%


44.0%

25.9%

39.2%

% of Total

32.3%

6.8%

39.2%

53

13

66

80.3%

19.7%

100.0%


16.4%

11.2%

15.0%

% of Total

12.1%

3.0%

15.0%

323

116

439

73.6%

26.4%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

73.6%

26.4%

100.0%


strongly agree


Total

Count % within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within Central Macedonia % of Total


df

sided)

25.205a

4

.000

Likelihood Ratio

24.039

4

.000


19.187

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

439


Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? * Less than a Year

Dissertation

165


Crosstab Less than a Year NO Benefits_What is your overall strongly disagree

Count





YES

Total

19

1

20

95.0%

5.0%

100.0%

% within Less than a Year

4.3%

50.0%

4.6%

% of Total

4.3%

0.2%

4.6%

50

0

50

100.0%

0.0%

100.0%


11.4%

0.0%

11.4%

% of Total

11.4%

0.0%

11.4%

131

0

131

100.0%

0.0%

100.0%


30.0%

0.0%

29.8%

% of Total

29.8%

0.0%

29.8%

171

1

172

99.4%

0.6%

100.0%


39.1%

50.0%

39.2%

% of Total

39.0%

0.2%

39.2%

66

0

66

100.0%

0.0%

100.0%


15.1%

0.0%

15.0%

% of Total

15.0%

0.0%

15.0%

437

2

439


disagree


undecided


agree


strongly agree


Total

Dissertation

Count

166



99.5%

0.5%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

99.5%

0.5%

100.0%

your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within Less than a Year % of Total


df

sided)

10.298a

4

.036

Likelihood Ratio

5.327

4

.255


1.859

1

.173

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

439


Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? * 10-20 years

Crosstab 10-20 years NO Benefits_What is your overall strongly

Count



disagree


YES

Total

16

4

20

80.0%

20.0%

100.0%

% within 10-20 years

5.0%

3.3%

4.6%

% of Total

3.6%

0.9%

4.6%

31

19

50

62.0%

38.0%

100.0%


9.8%

15.6%

11.4%

% of Total

7.1%

4.3%

11.4%

overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS?

disagree


Dissertation

167


undecided

Count

85

46

131

64.9%

35.1%

100.0%


26.8%

37.7%

29.8%

% of Total

19.4%

10.5%

29.8%

134

38

172

77.9%

22.1%

100.0%


42.3%

31.1%

39.2%

% of Total

30.5%

8.7%

39.2%

51

15

66

77.3%

22.7%

100.0%


16.1%

12.3%

15.0%

% of Total

11.6%

3.4%

15.0%

317

122

439

72.2%

27.8%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

72.2%

27.8%

100.0%


agree


strongly

Count

agree


Total

Count % within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within 10-20 years % of Total

Chi-Square Tests Asymptotic Significance (2Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases

df

sided)

a

4

.035

10.220

4

.037

3.674

1

.055

10.329

439


Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? * 20+ years Dissertation

168


Crosstab 20+ years NO Benefits_What is your overall strongly disagree

Count





YES

Total

11

9

20

55.0%

45.0%

100.0%

% within 20+ years

5.6%

3.7%

4.6%

% of Total

2.5%

2.1%

4.6%

26

24

50

52.0%

48.0%

100.0%

13.1%

10.0%

11.4%

5.9%

5.5%

11.4%

69

62

131

52.7%

47.3%

100.0%

% within 20+ years

34.8%

25.7%

29.8%

% of Total

15.7%

14.1%

29.8%

63

109

172

36.6%

63.4%

100.0%

% within 20+ years

31.8%

45.2%

39.2%

% of Total

14.4%

24.8%

39.2%

29

37

66

43.9%

56.1%

100.0%

14.6%

15.4%

15.0%


disagree

Count % within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within 20+ years % of Total

undecided


agree


strongly agree

Count % within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within 20+ years

Dissertation

169


% of Total Total

6.6%

8.4%

15.0%

198

241

439

45.1%

54.9%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

45.1%

54.9%

100.0%

Count % within Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within 20+ years % of Total


df

sided)

9.808a

4

.044

Likelihood Ratio

9.861

4

.043


4.828

1

.028

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

439


Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? * >5

Crosstab >5 NO Benefits_What is your overall strongly disagree

Count





YES

Total

12

8

20

60.0%

40.0%

100.0 %


disagree

Dissertation

% within >5

3.3%

10.0%

4.6%

% of Total

2.7%

1.8%

4.6%

40

10

50

Count

170



80.0%

20.0%


100.0 %

regarding the implementation of QMS? % within >5 % of Total undecided


11.1%

12.5% 11.4%

9.1%

2.3% 11.4%

103

28

131

78.6%

21.4%

100.0


%


agree

% within >5

28.7%

35.0% 29.8%

% of Total

23.5%

6.4% 29.8%


146

26

172

84.9%

15.1%

100.0


%


strongly agree

% within >5

40.7%

32.5% 39.2%

% of Total

33.3%

5.9% 39.2%


58

8

66

87.9%

12.1%

100.0


%


Total

% within >5

16.2%

10.0% 15.0%

% of Total

13.2%

1.8% 15.0%


359

80

439

81.8%

18.2%

100.0


%

regarding the implementation of QMS? % within >5

100.0%

100.0%

100.0 %

% of Total

81.8%

18.2%

100.0 %

Chi-Square Tests

Dissertation

171

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Asymptotic Significance (2Value

df

sided)

10.106a

4

.039

Likelihood Ratio

9.080

4

.059


7.670

1

.006

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

439


Benefits_What is your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? * 10-250

Crosstab 10-250 NO Benefits_What is your overall strongly disagree

Count





YES 20

100.0%

Total 0

20

0.0% 100.0%


disagree

% within 10-250

5.8%

0.0%

4.6%

% of Total

4.6%

0.0%

4.6%

46

4

50


92.0%

8.0% 100.0%

% within 10-250

13.5%

4.1%

11.4%

% of Total

10.5%

0.9%

11.4%

111

20

131


undecided


84.7%

15.3% 100.0%

% within 10-250

32.5%

20.6%

29.8%

% of Total

25.3%

4.6%

29.8%


Dissertation

172


agree

Count

122


50

172

70.9%

29.1% 100.0%

% within 10-250

35.7%

51.5%

39.2%

% of Total

27.8%

11.4%

39.2%

43

23

66


strongly agree


65.2%

34.8% 100.0%

12.6%

23.7%

15.0%

9.8%

5.2%

15.0%

342

97

439

your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within 10-250 % of Total Total


77.9%

22.1% 100.0%

100.0%

100.0% 100.0%

77.9%

22.1% 100.0%

your overall satisfaction regarding the implementation of QMS? % within 10-250 % of Total


df

sided)

26.088a

4

.000

Likelihood Ratio

31.159

4

.000


25.102

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

439


Πίνακας 0-1 2.Relationship of QMS with strategies employed during economic recession

2. Relationship of QMS with strategies employed during economic recession

Dissertation

173

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Variable Better selection of suppliers * >5 Better selection of suppliers * ACCOMMODATION AND FOOD SERVICES Better selection of suppliers * Classification Better selection of suppliers * ISO 14001 Better selection of suppliers * ISO 22000 Better selection of suppliers * MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS Better selection of suppliers * Peloponnese Better selection of suppliers * PROFESSIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL SERVICES Decrease cost of production * Attica Decrease cost of production * Central Macedonia Decrease cost of production * Classification Decrease cost of production * ELECTRICITY, GAS, STEAM AND AIR CONDITIONING Decrease cost of production * ISO 22000 Decrease cost of production * ISO 9001 Decrease cost of production * MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS Decrease cost of production * OTHER SERVICES Decrease cost of production * PROFESSIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL SERVICES Decrease operational costs * 10-45 Decrease operational costs * 50-100 Decrease operational costs * Employees Develop and train staff * >5 Develop and train staff * 100-250 Develop and train staff * 6-9 Develop and train staff * ACCOMMODATION AND FOOD SERVICES Develop and train staff * Attica Develop and train staff * Central Macedonia Develop and train staff * Classification Develop and train staff * ISO 14001 Develop and train staff * ISO 22000 Develop and train staff * Region Extroversion * Classification Extroversion * ISO 14001 Extroversion * ISO 22000 Extroversion * MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS Extroversion * Peloponnese Extroversion * WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE SERVICES Focus on quality * >5 Focus on quality * 100-250 Focus on quality * ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPPORT SERVICES Focus on quality * Attica Focus on quality * Central Macedonia Focus on quality * Classification Focus on quality * Employees Focus on quality * ISO 20000 Focus on quality * MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS Focus on quality * Region Focus on quality * WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE SERVICES Improve productivity * >5 Improve productivity * 100-250 Improve productivity * Classification Improve productivity * Employees Improve productivity * ISO 14001 Improve productivity * ISO 22000 Improve productivity * MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS Improve productivity * PROFESSIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL SERVICES Improve productivity * WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE SERVICES Operational restructuring * HUMAN HEALTH AND SOCIAL WORK SERVICES Operational restructuring * ISO 14001 Operational restructuring * ISO 50001

Dissertation

χ2

df p ( sig)

a

1

0.039

a

1

0.043

a

18

0.007

a

1

0.004

a

1

0.023

a

1

0.002

a

1

0.007

a

1

0.001

a

1

0.001

a

1

0.007

a

12

0.021

a

1

0.043

a

1

0.006

6.819

a

1

0.009

13.932a

1

0.000

a

1

0.014

a

1

0.032

a

1

0.022

a

1

0.008

a

5

0.035

a

1

0.001

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.008

a

1

0.009

a

1

0.018

a

1

0.038

a

18

0.050

a

1

0.001

a

1

0.035

a

5

0.000

a

18

0.043

a

1

0.002

a

1

0.046

a

1

0.001

a

1

0.005

a

1

0.014

a

1

0.005

a

1

0.001

a

1

0.001

a

1

0.023

a

1

0.007

a

18

0.005

a

5

0.002

a

1

0.047

a

1

0.000

a

12

0.004

a

1

0.042

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.000

a

18

0.000

a

5

0.000

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.035

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.005

a

1

0.035

a

1

0.022

a

1

0.017

a

1

0.002

4.282 4.082

36.273 8.449 5.176 9.171 7.199

10.379 11.548 7.325

23.875 4.090 7.573

6.045 4.592 5.248 7.037

11.991 11.343 19.174 7.108 6.891 5.550 4.307

28.879 12.060 4.468

32.540 29.419 9.809 3.995

10.392 7.939 6.044 7.771

10.627 11.555 5.204 7.202

37.243 18.694 3.960

12.998 28.945 4.144

21.598 26.134 62.115 40.243 14.184 4.424

39.755 7.957 4.464 5.257 5.720 9.900

174


Variable Reduced staffing level * 100-250 Reduced staffing level * 10-45 Reduced staffing level * 6-9 Reduced staffing level * ACCOMMODATION AND FOOD SERVICES Reduced staffing level * Attica Reduced staffing level * Central Macedonia Reduced staffing level * Classification Reduced staffing level * EDUCATION SERVICES Reduced staffing level * Employees Reduced staffing level * ISO 9001 Reduced staffing level * MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS Reduced staffing level * Region Renegotiate relationships with customers * 100-250 Renegotiate relationships with customers * Classification Renegotiate relationships with customers * HACCP Renegotiate relationships with customers * ISO 14001 Renegotiate relationships with customers * ISO 20000 Renegotiate relationships with customers * MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS Renegotiate relationships with customers * PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND DEFENCE Renegotiate relationships with customers * REAL ESTATE SERVICES Search of new sales markets or activities * ACCOMMODATION AND FOOD SERVICES Search of new sales markets or activities * Classification Search of new sales markets or activities * HACCP Search of new sales markets or activities * ISO 14001 Search of new sales markets or activities * ISO 20000 Search of synergies * ISO 14001 Search of synergies * ISO 9001

χ2

df p ( sig)

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.033

a

1

0.010

a

1

0.017

a

1

0.003

a

1

0.000

a

18

0.006

a

1

0.024

a

5

0.000

a

1

0.038

a

1

0.001

a

12

0.001

a

1

0.017

a

18

0.008

a

1

0.047

a

1

0.016

a

1

0.024

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.043

a

1

0.036

a

1

0.000

a

18

0.008

a

1

0.047

a

1

0.016

a

1

0.000

a

1

0.033

a

1

0.003

18.657 4.563 6.715 5.694 8.528

15.808 36.402 5.117

25.045 4.298

11.031 33.335 5.737

35.583 3.949 5.836 5.115

12.162 4.090 4.402

15.921 35.583 3.949 5.836

19.950 4.547 8.673

3. Relationship of QMS overall benefit What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * Lean

Crosstab Lean NO What is

strongly

Count

your

disagree % within What is your overall satisfaction from the

overall

implementation of Quality Improvement programs

satisfact

in your company?

ion from

% within Lean

the

% of Total impleme disagree Count

Dissertation

YES

Total

4

1

5

80.0%

20.0%

100.0%

3.2%

0.6%

1.7%

1.4%

0.3%

1.7%

9

2

11

175


ntation

% within What is your overall satisfaction from the

81.8%

18.2%

100.0%

of

implementation of Quality Improvement programs

Quality

in your company?

Improve ment

% within Lean

7.3%

1.2%

3.8%

% of Total

3.1%

0.7%

3.8%

32

17

49

65.3%

34.7%

100.0%

% within Lean

25.8%

10.4%

17.1%

% of Total

11.1%

5.9%

17.1%

59

91

150

39.3%

60.7%

100.0%

% within Lean

47.6%

55.8%

52.3%

% of Total

20.6%

31.7%

52.3%

20

52

72

27.8%

72.2%

100.0%

16.1%

31.9%

25.1%

7.0%

18.1%

25.1%

124

163

287

43.2%

56.8%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

43.2%

56.8%

100.0%

program undecide Count s in your d % within What is your overall satisfaction from the compan implementation of Quality Improvement programs y?

in your company?

agree

Count % within What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company?

strongly

Count

agree

% within What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Lean % of Total

Total


% within Lean % of Total


Dissertation

df

sided)

27.096a

4

.000

27.707

4

.000

176



25.076

N of Valid Cases

1

.000

287


What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * Six Sigma

Crosstab Six Sigma NO What is your

strongly

Count

overall

disagree


YES

Total

5

0

5

100.0%

0.0%

100.0%

satisfaction

implementation of Quality Improvement programs in

from the

your company?

implementation

% within Six Sigma

2.4%

0.0%

1.7%

of Quality

% of Total

1.7%

0.0%

1.7%

9

2

11

81.8%

18.2%

100.0%

% within Six Sigma

4.2%

2.7%

3.8%

% of Total

3.1%

0.7%

3.8%

44

5

49

89.8%

10.2%

100.0%

% within Six Sigma

20.8%

6.7%

17.1%

% of Total

15.3%

1.7%

17.1%

111

39

150

74.0%

26.0%

100.0%

% within Six Sigma

52.4%

52.0%

52.3%

% of Total

38.7%

13.6%

52.3%

43

29

72

Improvement

disagree

programs in

Count % within What is your overall satisfaction from the

your


company?

your company?

undecided


agree


Count

Dissertation

177


strongly


59.7%

40.3%

100.0%

agree


% within Six Sigma

20.3%

38.7%

25.1%

% of Total

15.0%

10.1%

25.1%

212

75

287

73.9%

26.1%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

73.9%

26.1%

100.0%

your company?

Total


% within Six Sigma % of Total


df

sided)

16.034a

4

.003

Likelihood Ratio

18.010

4

.001


13.805

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

287


What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * TQM

Crosstab TQM NO strongly disagree

Dissertation

Count

YES 4

Total 1

178

5


What is your overall

% within What is

80.0%

20.0%

100.0%

satisfaction from the

your overall

implementation of Quality

satisfaction from

Improvement programs in

the implementation

your company?

of Quality

% within TQM

2.1%

1.1%

1.7%

% of Total

1.4%

0.3%

1.7%

5

6

11

45.5%

54.5%

100.0%

% within TQM

2.6%

6.5%

3.8%

% of Total

1.7%

2.1%

3.8%

25

24

49

51.0%

49.0%

100.0%

12.9%

25.8%

17.1%

8.7%

8.4%

17.1%

103

47

150

Improvement programs in your company?

disagree


undecided

Count % within What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within TQM % of Total

agree

Dissertation

Count

179


% within What is

68.7%

31.3%

100.0%

% within TQM

53.1%

50.5%

52.3%

% of Total

35.9%

16.4%

52.3%

57

15

72

79.2%

20.8%

100.0%

% within TQM

29.4%

16.1%

25.1%

% of Total

19.9%

5.2%

25.1%

194

93

287

67.6%

32.4%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

67.6%

32.4%

100.0%

your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company?

strongly agree


Total

Count % within What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within TQM % of Total


Dissertation

df

sided)

13.439a

4

.009

13.267

4

.010

180



8.234

N of Valid Cases

1

.004

287


What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * How many years do you use the above mentioned Quality Improvement programs?

Crosstab How many years do you use the above mentioned Quality Improvement programs? 6-7 1-3

10+

έτη What is your strongly

Count

overall

% within What is your overall

disagree

satisfaction


from the


implementati


on of Quality

your company?

Improvemen

% within How many years

t programs

do you use the above

in your

mentioned Quality

company?

Improvement programs? % of Total

disagree


4-5

0

1

0

0.0%

20.0

0.0%

%

0.0%

2.0%

0.3%

0.0%

0.0%

s

s 0

Yet

Year

2

0.0 40.0

40.

0.0% 100

0%

.0%

%

%

0.0

4.7

50.

%

%

0%

0.0

0.7

0.7

%

%

%

0

al

2

0.0%

5

1.7 %

0.0%

1.7 %

5

1

1

0

1

1

45.5%

9.1%

9.1%

0.0

9.1

9.1

18.2 100

%

%

%

% .0%

implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company?

Dissertation

Less

year Year Not than a Tot

Years Years

0.0%

8-10

181

2

11


% within How many years

7.0%

2.0%

2.0%


0.0

2.3

25.

%

%

0%

0.0

0.3

0.3

9.1%

3.8 %

mentioned Quality Improvement programs? % of Total

undecided

Count % within What is your overall

1.7%

0.3%

0.3%

%

%

%

17

10

8

4

3

0

34.7%

20.4

16.3

8.2

6.1

0.0

14.3 100

%

%

%

%

%

% .0%

20.4

15.7

8.5

7.0

0.0

31.8

17.

%

%

%

%

%

%

1%

3.5%

2.8%

1.4

1.0

0.0

2.4%

17.

%

%

%

1%

23

29

1

8 150

15.3 19.3

0.7

5.3% 100

%

.0%


0.7%

3.8

7

49

%

implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within How many years

23.9%

do you use the above mentioned Quality Improvement programs? % of Total

agree


5.9%

34

27

28

22.7%

18.0

18.7

%

%

55.1

54.9

%

%

9.4%

9.8%


%

%


47.9%


48.9 67.4

25.

36.4

52.

%

0%

%

3%

8.0 10.1

0.3

2.8%

52.

%

mentioned Quality Improvement programs? % of Total

strongly

Count

agree


11.8%

15

10

14

20.8%

13.9

19.4

%

%

20.4

27.5

%

%


%

%

%

20

8

0

27.8 11.1

3% 5

72

0.0

6.9% 100

%

%

.0%

42.6 18.6

0.0

22.7

25.

%

%

1%

%

implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within How many years do you use the above

21.1%

%

%

mentioned Quality Improvement programs?

Dissertation

182


% of Total

Total

5.2%


3.5%

4.9%

71

49

51

24.7%

17.1

17.8

%

%


7.0

2.8

0.0

%

%

%

1%

47

43

4

22 287

16.4 15.0

1.4

7.7% 100

%

.0%

100. 100. 100

100.0 100

%

%

1.7%

25.


100.0


%

100.0 100.0 %

%

0%

0%

.0

mentioned Quality

% .0%

%

Improvement programs? % of Total

24.7%

17.1

17.8

%

%

16.4 15.0 %

%

1.4

7.7% 100

%

.0%


df

sided)

92.930a

24

.000

51.596

24

.001

N of Valid Cases

287


What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * Management Change

Crosstab Management Change

Count

Dissertation

strongly

disagr

undecid

disagree

ee

ed

4

0

strongly agree

0

0

183

agree

Total 1

5


What is

strongly


your

disagree


overall


satisfacti


on from

your company?

the

% within Management

impleme

Change

ntation of

% of Total

Quality

disagree

Count

Improve


ment


programs


in your


company

your company?

?

% within Management

80.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

20.0%

100.0 %

6.3%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.9%

1.7%

1.4%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.3%

1.7%

6

0

1

3

1

11

54.5%

0.0%

9.1%

27.3%

9.1%

100.0 %

9.4%

0.0%

2.6%

2.8%

1.9%

3.8%

2.1%

0.0%

0.3%

1.0%

0.3%

3.8%

12

5

12

16

4

49

24.5%

10.2%

24.5%

32.7%

8.2%

100.0

Change % of Total undecided


%

implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Management

18.8%

20.8%

30.8%

15.0%

7.5%

17.1%

4.2%

1.7%

4.2%

5.6%

1.4%

17.1%

32

16

19

64

19

150

21.3%

10.7%

12.7%

42.7%

12.7%

100.0

Change % of Total agree


%


50.0%

66.7%

48.7%

59.8%

35.8%

52.3%

11.1%

5.6%

6.6%

22.3%

6.6%

52.3%

10

3

7

24

28

72

Change % of Total Count

Dissertation

184


strongly


agree


13.9%

4.2%

9.7%

33.3%

38.9%

100.0 %


15.6%

12.5%

17.9%

22.4%

52.8%

25.1%

3.5%

1.0%

2.4%

8.4%

9.8%

25.1%

64

24

39

107

53

287

22.3%

8.4%

13.6%

37.3%

18.5%

100.0

Change % of Total Total


%


100.0%

100.0

Change

100.0%

%

% of Total

22.3%

8.4%

100.0

100.0%

% 13.6%

37.3%

100.0 %

18.5%

100.0 %


df

sided)

51.315a

16

.000

Likelihood Ratio

47.835

16

.000


21.926

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

287


What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * Loss of market share

Crosstab

Dissertation

185

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Loss of market share strongly

disagr undecid

disagree What is your

strongly

Count

overall satisfaction disagree

% within What is

from the

your overall

implementation of

satisfaction from

Quality

the

Improvement

implementation of

programs in your

Quality

company?

Improvement

ee

ed

strongly agree

agree

Total

4

1

0

0

0

5

80.0%

20.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

100.0 %

programs in your company? % within Loss of

6.2%

2.2%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

1.4%

0.3%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

5

1

3

2

0

11

45.5%

9.1%

27.3% 18.2%

0.0%

100.0

market share % of Total disagree


%

satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Loss of

7.7%

2.2%

5.0%

2.6%

0.0%

3.8%

1.7%

0.3%

1.0%

0.7%

0.0%

3.8%

13

15

15

5

1

49

26.5%

30.6%

30.6% 10.2%

2.0%

100.0

market share % of Total undecided


%

satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company?

Dissertation

186


% within Loss of

20.0%

32.6%

25.0%

6.5%

2.6%

17.1%

4.5%

5.2%

5.2%

1.7%

0.3%

17.1%

32

24

31

48

15

150

21.3%

16.0%

20.7% 32.0%

10.0%

100.0

market share % of Total agree


%


49.2%

52.2%

51.7% 62.3%

38.5%

52.3%

11.1%

8.4%

10.8% 16.7%

5.2%

52.3%

11

5

22

23

72

15.3%

6.9%

15.3% 30.6%

31.9%

100.0

market share % of Total strongly

Count

agree

% within What is

11

your overall

%


16.9%

10.9%

18.3% 28.6%

59.0%

25.1%

3.8%

1.7%

3.8%

7.7%

8.0%

25.1%

65

46

60

77

39

287

22.6%

16.0%

20.9% 26.8%

13.6%

100.0

market share % of Total Total


%

satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company?

Dissertation

187


% within Loss of

100.0%

100.0 100.0%

market share % of Total

22.6%

100.0

%

%

16.0%

20.9% 26.8%

100.0%

100.0 %

13.6%

100.0 %


df

sided)

a

16

.000

Likelihood Ratio

62.128

16

.000


35.986

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

61.926

N of Valid Cases

287


What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * Competitition Other companies using similar strategies Crosstab Competitition - Other companies using similar strategies

What is

strongly

Count

your

disagre


overall

e


satisfacti


on from

Improvement programs in your

the

company?

impleme

% within Competitition - Other

ntation of

companies using similar

Quality

strategies

Improve

% of Total

ment

Count

Dissertation

strongly

disagr

undeci

disagree

ee

ded

strongly agree

agree

Total

4

0

1

0

0

5

80.0%

0.0%

20.0%

0.0%

0.0%

100.0 %

9.3%

0.0%

1.4%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

1.4%

0.0%

0.3%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

2

1

4

3

1

11

188


programs disagre


in your


e

company


?


18.2%

9.1%

36.4% 27.3%

9.1%

100.0 %

company? % within Competitition - Other

4.7%

3.1%

5.4%

3.4%

2.0%

3.8%

0.7%

0.3%

1.4%

1.0%

0.3%

3.8%

15

9

13

11

1

49

26.5% 22.4%

2.0%

100.0

companies using similar strategies % of Total undecid

Count

ed


30.6% 18.4%


%

implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Competitition - Other

34.9% 28.1%

17.6% 12.5%

2.0% 17.1%

companies using similar strategies % of Total agree


5.2%

3.1%

4.5%

3.8%

17

18

46

49

20

150

30.7% 32.7%

13.3%

100.0

11.3% 12.0%

0.3% 17.1%


%


39.5% 56.3%

62.2% 55.7%

40.0% 52.3%

16.0% 17.1%

7.0% 52.3%

companies using similar strategies % of Total strongly

Count

agree


5.9%

6.3%

5

4

6.9%

5.6%

10

25

28

72

13.9% 34.7%

38.9%

100.0


%


11.6% 12.5%

13.5% 28.4%

56.0% 25.1%

companies using similar strategies % of Total Total

Dissertation

Count

1.7%

1.4%

3.5%

8.7%

43

32

74

88

9.8% 25.1% 50

189

287



15.0% 11.1%

25.8% 30.7%

17.4%

100.0


%


100.0%

100.0 100.0%

companies using similar

100.0

%

%

15.0% 11.1%

25.8% 30.7%

100.0%

100.0 %

strategies % of Total

17.4%

100.0 %


df

sided)

69.192a

16

.000

Likelihood Ratio

64.188

16

.000


41.715

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

287


What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * Unhappy customers

Crosstab Unhappy customers

What is

strongly

Count

your overall disagree % within What is your overall satisfaction


from the


implementa


tion of

company?

Dissertation

strongly

disagr

undecid

disagree

ee

ed

strongly agree

agree

Total

5

0

0

0

0

5

100.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

100.0 %

190


Quality

% within Unhappy customers

7.2%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

Improveme

% of Total

1.7%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

7

1

1

2

0

11

63.6%

9.1%

9.1%

18.2%

0.0%

100.0

nt

disagree Count

programs in


your


company?


%

Improvement programs in your company? % within Unhappy customers % of Total undecide Count d


10.1%

2.0%

2.1%

2.9%

0.0%

3.8%

2.4%

0.3%

0.3%

0.7%

0.0%

3.8%

13

16

10

9

1

49

26.5%

32.7%

20.4%

18.4%

2.0%

100.0


%

implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Unhappy customers % of Total agree


18.8%

32.0%

21.3%

13.0%

1.9%

17.1%

4.5%

5.6%

3.5%

3.1%

0.3%

17.1%

31

27

28

42

22

150

20.7%

18.0%

18.7%

28.0%

14.7%

100.0


%

implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Unhappy customers

44.9%

54.0%

59.6%

60.9%

42.3%

52.3%

% of Total

10.8%

9.4%

9.8%

14.6%

7.7%

52.3%

13

6

8

16

29

72

18.1%

8.3%

11.1%

22.2%

40.3%

100.0

strongly

Count

agree


%

implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Unhappy customers % of Total Total


18.8%

12.0%

17.0%

23.2%

55.8%

25.1%

4.5%

2.1%

2.8%

5.6%

10.1%

25.1%

69

50

47

69

52

287

24.0%

17.4%

16.4%

24.0%

18.1%

100.0


%

implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company?

Dissertation

191


% within Unhappy customers

100.0%

100.0

100.0%

100.0

% % of Total

24.0%

17.4%

100.0%

100.0

% 16.4%

%

24.0%

18.1%

100.0 %


df

sided)

a

16

.000

Likelihood Ratio

66.673

16

.000


37.329

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

69.201

N of Valid Cases

287


What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * Timely delivery of the product or service

Crosstab Timely delivery of the product or service

What is

strongly

Count

your overall disagree

% within What is your

satisfaction

overall satisfaction from

from the


implementa

Quality Improvement

tion of

programs in your

Quality

company?

Improveme

% within Timely delivery

nt

of the product or service

programs in

% of Total disagree

Dissertation

Count

strongly

disagr

undecid

disagree

ee

ed

strongly agree

agree

Total

5

0

0

0

0

5

100.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

100.0 %

12.8%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

1.7%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

3

2

3

2

1

11

192


your


company?


27.3%

18.2%

27.3%

18.2%

9.1%

100.0 %

the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Timely delivery

7.7%

8.7%

5.6%

2.0%

1.4%

3.8%

1.0%

0.7%

1.0%

0.7%

0.3%

3.8%

14

6

13

15

1

49

28.6%

12.2%

26.5%

30.6%

2.0%

100.0

of the product or service % of Total undecided

Count % within What is your overall satisfaction from

%


35.9%

26.1%

24.1%

14.7%

1.4%

17.1%

4.9%

2.1%

4.5%

5.2%

0.3%

17.1%

14

10

27

66

33

150

9.3%

6.7%

18.0%

44.0%

22.0%

100.0

of the product or service % of Total agree


%


35.9%

43.5%

50.0%

64.7%

47.8%

52.3%

4.9%

3.5%

9.4%

23.0%

11.5%

52.3%

3

5

11

19

34

72

4.2%

6.9%

15.3%

26.4%

47.2%

100.0

of the product or service % of Total strongly

Count

agree

% within What is your overall satisfaction from

%


7.7%

21.7%

20.4%

18.6%

49.3%

25.1%

1.0%

1.7%

3.8%

6.6%

11.8%

25.1%

39

23

54

102

69

287

of the product or service % of Total Total

Dissertation

Count

193



13.6%

8.0%

18.8%

35.5%

24.0%

100.0


%


100.0%

100.0

of the product or service

100.0%

100.0

%

% of Total

13.6%

8.0%

100.0%

100.0

% 18.8%

%

35.5%

24.0%

100.0 %


df

sided)

a

16

.000

Likelihood Ratio

77.657

16

.000


52.969

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

86.789

287


What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * Provision of high quality products and services

Crosstab Provision of high quality products and services

Total

strong strongly

undeci

disagree Count

Dissertation

disagree 4

0

ded

ly agree

0

agree 1

0

194

5


What is

strong % within What is your

your

ly

overall

disagr the implementation of

80.0%

0.0%

0.0%

20.0%

0.0%


satisfact ee

Quality Improvement

ion from

programs in your

the

company?

impleme

% within Provision of

ntation

high quality products

of

and services

Quality

% of Total

Improve disagr Count ment ee % within What is your program overall satisfaction from s in your


compan

Quality Improvement

y?

programs in your

100.0 %

26.7%

0.0%

0.0%

0.8%

0.0%

1.7%

1.4%

0.0%

0.0%

0.3%

0.0%

1.7%

1

0

5

4

1

11

9.1%

0.0%

45.5%

36.4%

9.1%

100.0 %

company? % within Provision of

6.7%

0.0%

13.9%

3.0%

1.0%

3.8%

0.3%

0.0%

1.7%

1.4%

0.3%

3.8%

6

3

11

19

10

49

12.2%

6.1%

22.4%

38.8% 20.4%

100.0

high quality products and services % of Total undec Count ided

% within What is your overall satisfaction from

%

the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Provision of

40.0%

60.0%

30.6%

14.4% 10.1%

17.1%

2.1%

1.0%

3.8%

6.6%

3.5%

17.1%

3

2

15

84

46

150

2.0%

1.3%

10.0%

56.0% 30.7%

100.0

high quality products and services % of Total agree Count % within What is your overall satisfaction from

%

the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company?

Dissertation

195


% within Provision of

20.0%

40.0%

41.7%

63.6% 46.5%

52.3%

1.0%

0.7%

5.2%

29.3% 16.0%

52.3%

1

0

5

1.4%

0.0%

6.9%

high quality products and services % of Total strong Count ly


24

42

72

33.3% 58.3%

100.0

agree overall satisfaction from

%


6.7%

0.0%

13.9%

18.2% 42.4%

25.1%

0.3%

0.0%

1.7%

8.4% 14.6%

25.1%

15

5

36

5.2%

1.7%

12.5%

high quality products and services % of Total Total

Count % within What is your

132

99

287

46.0% 34.5%

100.0


%


100.0%

100.0% 100.0%

high quality products

100.0%

100.0

100.0

%

%

46.0% 34.5%

100.0

and services % of Total

5.2%

1.7%

12.5%

%


df

sided)

a

16

.000

Likelihood Ratio

71.908

16

.000


56.423

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

113.428

287


Dissertation

196


What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * Possibility of exploiting significant market opportunities

Crosstab Possibility of exploiting significant market opportunities

Total

unde

What

strongly

is your

disagree % within What is your overall

Count

overall


satisfa


ction


from

company?

the

% within Possibility of exploiting

implem

significant market opportunities

entatio

% of Total

n of

disagree Count

Quality


Improv

strongly

disagr

cide

disagree

ee

d

5 100.0%

0

agree

agree

0

0

0

5

0.0% 0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

100.0 %

29.4%

0.0% 0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

1.7%

0.0% 0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

3

1

3

3

1

11

27.3%

9.1%

27.3

27.3%

9.1%

100.0


ement

strongly

%

%


progra


ms in

company?

your

% within Possibility of exploiting

compa

17.6%

5.3% 5.2%

2.5%

1.4%

3.8%

1.0%

0.3% 1.0%

1.0%

0.3%

3.8%


ny?

% of Total undecid

Count

ed


5

9

15

16

4

49

10.2%

18.4%

30.6

32.7%

8.2%

100.0


%

%

implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Possibility of exploiting

29.4%

significant market opportunities % of Total

Dissertation

47.4%

25.9

13.4%

5.4% 17.1%

5.6%

1.4% 17.1%

% 1.7%

3.1% 5.2%

197


agree


2

7

34

72

35

150

1.3%

4.7%

22.7

48.0%

23.3%

100.0


%

%


11.8%

36.8%


58.6

60.5%

47.3% 52.3%

25.1%

12.2% 52.3%

%

% of Total

0.7%

2.4%

11.8 %

strongly

Count

2

agree


2.8%

2

6

28

34

72

2.8% 8.3%

38.9%

47.2%

100.0


%


11.8%

10.5%


23.5%

45.9% 25.1%

9.8%

11.8% 25.1%

%

% of Total Total

10.3

0.7%


0.7% 2.1%

17

19

58

119

74

287

5.9%

6.6%

20.2

41.5%

25.8%

100.0


%

%


100.0%

100.0

100.

%

0%

6.6%

20.2

significant market opportunities % of Total

5.9%

100.0%

100.0%

% 41.5%

25.8%

%

Asymptotic Significance (2df

sided)

a

16

.000

Likelihood Ratio

86.136

16

.000


66.852

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

Dissertation

140.469

100.0 %

Chi-Square Tests

Value

100.0

287

198

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises a. 14 cells (56.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .30.

What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * Possible benchmarking with other businesses / organizations

Crosstab Possible benchmarking with other businesses / organizations

Total strongl

What is your strongly

Count

overall

% within What

disagree

satisfaction

is your overall

from the

satisfaction from

implementati

the

on of Quality

implementation

Improvemen

of Quality

t programs

Improvement

in your

programs in

company?

your company? % within

strongly

disagr

undeci

disagree

ee

ded

y agree

agree

3

0

0

2

0

5

60.0%

0.0%

0.0%

40.0%

0.0%

100.0%

18.8%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

0.0%

1.7%

1.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.7%

0.0%

1.7%

3

0

4

4

0

11

Possible benchmarking with other businesses / organizations % of Total disagree

Dissertation

Count

199


% within What

27.3%

0.0%

36.4%

36.4%

0.0%

100.0%

18.8%

0.0%

7.1%

3.4%

0.0%

3.8%

1.0%

0.0%

1.4%

1.4%

0.0%

3.8%

6

6

13

18

6

49

12.2%

12.2%

26.5%

36.7%

12.2%

100.0%

37.5%

33.3%

23.2%

15.1%

7.7%

17.1%

2.1%

2.1%

4.5%

6.3%

2.1%

17.1%

3

10

33

70

34

150

is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Possible benchmarking with other businesses / organizations % of Total undecided Count % within What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Possible benchmarking with other businesses / organizations % of Total agree

Dissertation

Count

200


% within What

2.0%

6.7%

22.0%

46.7%

22.7%

100.0%

18.8%

55.6%

58.9%

58.8%

43.6%

52.3%

1.0%

3.5%

11.5%

24.4%

11.8%

52.3%

1

2

6

25

38

72

1.4%

2.8%

8.3%

34.7%

52.8%

100.0%

6.3%

11.1%

10.7%

21.0%

48.7%

25.1%

0.3%

0.7%

2.1%

8.7%

13.2%

25.1%

16

18

56

119

78

287

is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Possible benchmarking with other businesses / organizations % of Total strongly

Count

agree

% within What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Possible benchmarking with other businesses / organizations % of Total

Total

Dissertation

Count

201


% within What

5.6%

6.3%

19.5%

41.5%

27.2%

100.0%

100.0 100.0%

100.0

100.0

100.0%

%

%

41.5%

27.2%

is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within

100.0%

Possible

%

benchmarking with other businesses / organizations % of Total

5.6%

6.3%

19.5%

100.0%


df

sided)

88.556a

16

.000

Likelihood Ratio

71.623

16

.000


50.896

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

287


What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * Forecasting customer trends and wishes

Crosstab Forecasting customer trends and wishes

Dissertation

202

Total

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises strongl strongly

undeci

disagree What

strongly disagree Count

is your


overall


satisfa


ction

Quality Improvement

from

programs in your

the

company?

implem

% within Forecasting

entatio

customer trends and

n of

wishes

Quality

% of Total

Improv disagree ement

Count

progra


disagree

ded

y agree

agree

4

1

0

0

0

5

80.0%

20.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

100. 0%

30.8%

4.2%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0% 1.7%

1.4%

0.3%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0% 1.7%

1

2

4

3

1

11

9.1%

18.2%

36.4%

27.3%

9.1%

100.


ms in

0%


your

Quality Improvement

compa

programs in your

ny?

company? % within Forecasting

7.7%

8.3%

6.7%

2.6%

1.4% 3.8%

0.3%

0.7%

1.4%

1.0%

0.3% 3.8%

3

7

16

19

4

49

6.1%

14.3%

32.7%

38.8%

8.2%

100.

customer trends and wishes % of Total undecided


0%

the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Forecasting

23.1%

29.2%

26.7%

16.4%

5.4%

customer trends and

17.1 %

wishes % of Total

1.0%

2.4%

5.6%

6.6%

1.4%

17.1 %

agree

Dissertation

Count

2

11

30

69

203

38

150



1.3%

7.3%

20.0%

46.0%

25.3%


100. 0%


15.4%

45.8%

50.0%

59.5%

51.4%

customer trends and

52.3 %

wishes % of Total

0.7%

3.8%

10.5%

24.0%

13.2%

52.3 %

strongly agree


3

3

10

25

31

72

4.2%

4.2%

13.9%

34.7%

43.1%

100.


0%


23.1%

12.5%

16.7%

21.6%

41.9%

customer trends and

25.1 %

wishes % of Total

1.0%

1.0%

3.5%

8.7%

10.8%

25.1 %

Total


13

24

60

116

74

287

4.5%

8.4%

20.9%

40.4%

25.8%

100.


0%


100.0%

100.0%

customer trends and

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.

%

%

%

0%

20.9%

40.4%

25.8%

100.

wishes % of Total

4.5%

8.4%

0%

Chi-Square Tests

Dissertation

204

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Asymptotic Significance (2Value

df

sided)

101.166a

16

.000

Likelihood Ratio

59.403

16

.000


41.137

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

287


What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * Comply with technological developments and changes

Crosstab Comply with technological developments and changes

strongly disagree What is your

Count

overall

% within What is

satisfaction

your overall

from the

satisfaction from

disagree

undecided

agree

strongly agree

4

0

1

0

0

80.0%

0.0%

20.0%

0.0%

0.0%

33.3%

0.0%

1.6%

0.0%

0.0%

implementati the on of Quality

implementation

Improvemen

of Quality

t programs

Improvement

in your

programs in your

company?

company? % within Comply with technological developments and changes

Dissertation

205


% of Total

Count

% within What is

1.4%

0.0%

0.3%

0.0%

0.0%

1

1

5

4

0

9.1%

9.1%

45.5%

36.4%

0.0%

8.3%

4.8%

8.2%

3.4%

0.0%

0.3%

0.3%

1.7%

1.4%

0.0%

6

5

15

19

4

12.2%

10.2%

30.6%

38.8%

8.2%

50.0%

23.8%

24.6%

16.0%

5.4%

your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Comply with technological developments and changes % of Total

Count

% within What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Comply with technological developments and changes

Dissertation

206


% of Total

Count

% within What is

2.1%

1.7%

5.2%

6.6%

1.4%

0

10

33

68

39

0.0%

6.7%

22.0%

45.3%

26.0%

0.0%

47.6%

54.1%

57.1%

52.7%

0.0%

3.5%

11.5%

23.7%

13.6%

1

5

7

28

31

1.4%

6.9%

9.7%

38.9%

43.1%

your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Comply with technological developments and changes % of Total

Count

% within What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company?

Dissertation

207


% within Comply

8.3%

23.8%

11.5%

23.5%

41.9%

0.3%

1.7%

2.4%

9.8%

10.8%

12

21

61

119

74

4.2%

7.3%

21.3%

41.5%

25.8%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

4.2%

7.3%

21.3%

41.5%

25.8%

with technological developments and changes % of Total

Total

Count

% within What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Comply with technological developments and changes

% of Total


Dissertation

df

sided)

208


116.524a

16

.000

Likelihood Ratio

75.169

16

.000


49.004

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

287


What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * Pressure to reduce costs

Crosstab Pressure to reduce costs strongly disagree What is

str Count

your

on % within What is your

overall

gly overall satisfaction

satisfactio

dis from the

Total

undec disagree

ided

strongly agree

agree

3

1

0

0

1

5

60.0%

20.0%

0.0%

0.0%

20.0%

100.0 %

n from the ag implementation of implement re

Quality Improvement

ation of

programs in your

e

Quality

company?

Improvem

% within Pressure to

ent

reduce costs

programs

% of Total

in your

dis Count company? ag % within What is your re


e

from the

12.0%

2.9%

0.0%

0.0%

1.2%

1.7%

1.0%

0.3%

0.0%

0.0%

0.3%

1.7%

3

2

5

0

1

11

18.2% 45.5%

0.0%

9.1%

100.0

27.3%

%

implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Pressure to

12.0%

5.9%

9.6%

0.0%

1.2%

3.8%

1.0%

0.7%

1.7%

0.0%

0.3%

3.8%

reduce costs % of Total

Dissertation

209


un Count de % within What is your

10 20.4%

8

13

13

5

49

16.3% 26.5%

26.5%

10.2%

100.0

cid overall satisfaction

%

ed from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Pressure to

40.0%

23.5% 25.0%

13.7%

6.2% 17.1%

1.7% 17.1%

reduce costs % of Total ag Count re


e


3.5%

2.8%

4.5%

4.5%

5

16

29

59

41

150

10.7% 19.3%

39.3%

27.3%

100.0

3.3%

%

from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Pressure to

20.0%

47.1% 55.8%

62.1%

50.6% 52.3%

1.7%

5.6% 10.1%

20.6%

14.3% 52.3%

reduce costs % of Total str Count on % within What is your

4

7

5

23

33

72

5.6%

9.7%

6.9%

31.9%

45.8%

100.0

gly overall satisfaction

%

ag from the re

implementation of

e

Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Pressure to

16.0%

20.6%

9.6%

24.2%

40.7% 25.1%

1.4%

2.4%

1.7%

8.0%

11.5% 25.1%

25

34

52

95

reduce costs % of Total Total

Dissertation

Count

81

210

287



8.7%

11.8% 18.1%

33.1%

28.2%

100.0


%

from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Pressure to

100.0%

100.0%

100.0

reduce costs

100.0%

100.0%

100.0

%

% of Total

8.7%

%

11.8% 18.1%

33.1%

28.2%

100.0 %


df

sided)

70.186a

16

.000

Likelihood Ratio

66.520

16

.000


39.878

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

287


What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * Merge with another business or sector

Crosstab Merge with another business or sector strongly

undec

disagree Count

Dissertation

5

disagree

ided 0

0

Total

strongly agree

agree 0

0

211

5


What is your

stro % within What is your

overall satisfaction ngl


from the

y

from the

implementation of

dis

implementation of

Quality

agr

Quality Improvement

Improvement

ee

programs in your

programs in your

company?

company?

% within Merge with

100.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0% 100.0 %

3.5%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

1.7%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1.7%

8

1

2

0

0

11

9.1% 18.2%

0.0%

another business or sector % of Total dis

Count

agr


ee


72.7%

0.0% 100.0 %

from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Merge with

5.7%

2.9%

7.1%

0.0%

0.0%

3.8%

2.8%

0.3%

0.7%

0.0%

0.0%

3.8%

30

6

5

5

3

49

12.2% 10.2%

10.2%

another business or sector % of Total und Count eci


61.2%

6.1% 100.0

ded overall satisfaction

%


21.3%

17.1% 17.9%

11.6%

7.5%

another business or

17.1 %

sector % of Total

10.5%

2.1%

1.7%

1.7%

1.0%

17.1 %

Count

Dissertation

70

22

15

26

17

212

150


agr


ee


46.7%

14.7% 10.0%

17.3%

11.3% 100.0 %


49.6%

62.9% 53.6%

60.5%

42.5%

another business or

52.3 %

sector % of Total

24.4%

7.7%

5.2%

9.1%

5.9%

52.3 %

stro Count ngl


y


agr

from the

ee

implementation of

28

6

6

12

38.9%

8.3%

8.3%

16.7%

20

72

27.8% 100.0 %

Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Merge with

19.9%

17.1% 21.4%

27.9%

50.0%

another business or

25.1 %

sector % of Total

9.8%

2.1%

2.1%

4.2%

7.0%

25.1 %

Total


141

35

28

43

49.1%

12.2%

9.8%

15.0%

40

287

13.9% 100.0


%


100.0%

100.0%

another business or

100.0

100.0%

100.0% 100.0

%

%

sector % of Total

49.1%

12.2%

9.8%

15.0%

13.9% 100.0 %

Dissertation

213

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises Chi-Square Tests Asymptotic Significance (2Value

df

sided)

29.683a

16

.020

Likelihood Ratio

33.015

16

.007


20.179

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

287


What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? * Κατά τη διάρκεια της κρίσης έχετε αυξήσει ή μειώσει τις προσπαθειες σας για QIPs

Crosstab Κατά τη διάρκεια της κρίσης έχετε αυξήσει ή μειώσει τις προσπαθειες σας για QIPs

What is your

strongly

Count

overall

disagree


satisfaction from


the


implementation


of Quality

your company?

Improvement

% within Κατά τη διάρκεια

programs in

της κρίσης έχετε αυξήσει ή

your company?

μειώσει τις προσπαθειες σας

Decrease

Remained

d

Stable

Total Increased

2

3

0

5

40.0%

60.0%

0.0%

100.0%

14.3%

2.6%

0.0%

1.7%

0.7%

1.0%

0.0%

1.7%

1

5

5

11

για QIPs % of Total disagree

Dissertation

Count

214



9.1%

45.5%

45.5%

100.0%

7.1%

4.3%

3.2%

3.8%

0.3%

1.7%

1.7%

3.8%

5

27

17

49

10.2%

55.1%

34.7%

100.0%

35.7%

23.1%

10.9%

17.1%

1.7%

9.4%

5.9%

17.1%

5

59

86

150

3.3%

39.3%

57.3%

100.0%

35.7%

50.4%

55.1%

52.3%

1.7%

20.6%

30.0%

52.3%

1

23

48

72

1.4%

31.9%

66.7%

100.0%

satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Κατά τη διάρκεια της κρίσης έχετε αυξήσει ή μειώσει τις προσπαθειες σας για QIPs % of Total undecided

Count % within What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company? % within Κατά τη διάρκεια της κρίσης έχετε αυξήσει ή μειώσει τις προσπαθειες σας για QIPs % of Total

agree


strongly

Count

agree

% within What is your overall satisfaction from the implementation of Quality Improvement programs in your company?

Dissertation

215


% within Κατά τη διάρκεια

7.1%

19.7%

30.8%

25.1%

0.3%

8.0%

16.7%

25.1%

14

117

156

287

4.9%

40.8%

54.4%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

4.9%

40.8%

54.4%

100.0%

της κρίσης έχετε αυξήσει ή μειώσει τις προσπαθειες σας για QIPs % of Total Total



df

sided)

31.473a

8

.000

Likelihood Ratio

26.680

8

.001


21.838

1

.000

Pearson Chi-Square

N of Valid Cases

Dissertation

287

216

Victoria Tsolidou, Impact of the economic crisis on the Quality Management of Greek enterprises a.

7 cells (46.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .24.

Dissertation

217


APPENDIX D – DATA COLLECTION

Εικόνα 1 Athens Chamber Commerce & Industry newsletter

Dissertation

218


Εικόνα 2 Chamber of Commerce of Evros Newsletter

Dissertation

219


Εικόνα 3 Chamber of Commerce of Ileia Newsletter

Dissertation

220


Εικόνα 4 Samos chamber of Commerce Newsletter

Dissertation

221


Εικόνα 5 TUV Austria Hellas Newsletter

Dissertation

222


Υπεύθυνη Δήλωση Συγγραφέα: Δηλώνω ρητά ότι, σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 8 του Ν. 1599/1986 και τα άρθρα 2,4,6 παρ. 3 του Ν. 1256/1982, η παρούσα εργασία αποτελεί αποκλειστικά προϊόν προσωπικής εργασίας και δεν προσβάλλει κάθε μορφής πνευματικά δικαιώματα τρίτων και δεν είναι προϊόν μερικής ή ολικής αντιγραφής, οι πηγές δε που χρησιμοποιήθηκαν περιορίζονται στις βιβλιογραφικές αναφορές και μόνον.

Dissertation

223