study of the main motivations and discouraging factors for the implementation of iso 9000 standards...

This article was downloaded by: [The Aga Khan University]On: 10 October 2014, At: 22:33Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Journal of International Food &Agribusiness MarketingPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wifa20

Study of the Main Motivationsand Discouraging Factors forthe Implementation of ISO9000 Standards in SpanishAgribusiness SectorMa Teresa Maza Rubio a & Víctor Ramírez Arias BSc(Veterinary Science) aa Department of Agriculture and AgriculturalEconomics , University of Zaragoza , c/MiguelServet, 177, 50013, Zaragoza, SpainPublished online: 08 Sep 2008.

To cite this article: Ma Teresa Maza Rubio & Víctor Ramírez Arias BSc (VeterinaryScience) (2005) Study of the Main Motivations and Discouraging Factors for theImplementation of ISO 9000 Standards in Spanish Agribusiness Sector, Journalof International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 17:2, 229-243, DOI: 10.1300/J047v17n02_12

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J047v17n02_12

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wifa20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1300/J047v17n02_12

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1300/J047v17n02_12

http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J047v17n02_12

Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

33 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Study of the Main Motivationsand Discouraging Factors

for the Implementationof ISO 9000 Standards

in Spanish Agribusiness SectorMa Teresa Maza RubioVíctor Ramírez Arias

ABSTRACT. The implementation and certification of ISO 9000quality assurance systems in Spanish agribusiness companies is a re-cent although rapidly growing phenomenon. In spite of the extensivebiography available on ISO standards few works have been publishedon the experience from the companies’ point of view. This article carriesout an empirical analysis of the main motivations that encourage compa-nies to set up an ISO 9000 quality assurance system and also the reasonsthat discourage them from doing so. The analysis of this latter aspect, us-ing multivariate methodology, allows an in-depth examination of the se-ries of problems that agribusinesses face. [Article copies available for a feedress: <[email protected]> Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.com> © 2005 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]

Ma Teresa Maza Rubio is Professor (Permanent Staff), Department of Agricultureand Agricultural Economics, University of Zaragoza, c/Miguel Servet, 177, 50013Zaragoza (Spain) (E-mail: [email protected]). Víctor Ramírez Arias is Con-ducting Doctoral Research, BSc (Veterinary Science), Department of Agricultureand Agricultural Economics, University of Zaragoza, c/Miguel Servet, 177, 50013Zaragoza (Spain) (E-mail: [email protected]).

Address correspondence to Ma Teresa Maza Rubio at the above address.This research is based on work funded by the Food Administration under the Order

of 4th July 1985 of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food on Technical AidPlans for the Food Industry.

Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, Vol. 17(2) 2005Available online at: http://www.haworthpress.com/web/JIFAM

2005 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.doi:10.1300/J047v17n02_12 229

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

33 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

KEYWORDS. ISO 9000 standards, quality assurance system, Spanishagribusiness sector, multivariate analysis

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The first international ISO 9000 standards derive from the BS5750 British military norm, which was published in 1979 to regulatecontracts. However, a political objective of such importance as theunification of Europe brought to light the need to create a singlequality norm or standard. The Geneva-based International Organisa-tion for Standardisation was asked to prepare a norm. In 1979, theISO created the 176 Technical Committee to draw up a standardisedquality norm. In 1987, the ISO presented the first ISO 9000 docu-ments. The norm consisted of concepts and general guidelines (ISO9000), guides with recommendations on quality management (ISO9004), and three quality systems (ISO 9001, 9002 and 9003) (MAPA,1999). The importance of the ISO 9000 standards lies in their capac-ity to regulate quality assurance in companies, and their objective isto establish the requirements for a quality system which can be ap-plied to demonstrate the capacity of a supplier to design and supply aconforming product (Badía, 1998).

ISO 9000 standards have been more widely adopted in Europe thanin the rest of the world; in fact approximately two thirds of ISO-certi-fied companies are located in Europe, the UK being the country withthe greatest relative percentage of such companies (39%) (MAPA,1999). In Europe the creation of the single market has encouraged theadoption of these standards as the European Commission considersthat community companies should progressively introduce qualitysystems based on the ISO 9000 standards (or on any other recognisedstandard: QS 9000, PECAL, etc.) and for said systems to then becertified by authorised bodies. Along the same lines as this proposal,EU directives suggest that one of the ways of evaluating the conformityof products and of thus guaranteeing their conformity with safety stan-dards is the existence of a quality system in the company. Communitypolicy has thus gradually widened its scope of application; it no longeronly asks member countries to improve and equate their infrastructuresbut also companies and entities to assure and improve their quality man-agement systems (Badía, 1998).

In North America, the incidence of adoption of quality assurancestandards has been lower, 8.4% of certified companies at world level

230 JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL FOOD & AGRIBUSINESS MARKETING

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

33 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

(MAPA, 1999) of which 7% are US firms (Mumma et al., 2000). Sev-eral authors have studied the reasons why, in principle, the adoption ofvoluntary quality standards is much lower. Anitfos (Cit. Mumma et al.,2000) points to the European origin of the standards and that the gov-ernment was not involved in their application, unlike in Europe wheregovernments headed their implantation as we have just seen (Green,1997; Johnson, 1998; Hooker et al., 1999). Other reasons, such as un-awareness, an insistence on the process more than on the explicit qualityof the product, difficulties in implementation and interpretation, and thenon-compulsory nature of the norms, may also have had a discouragingeffect (Ho, 1995).

Recently, different authors have described the beneficial effects thatthe adoption of quality assurance systems have on companies. To men-tion just some of these and limiting ourselves to the agribusiness sector,Ramírez (1995) pointed out the need to adopt these norms basically be-cause of their international nature, as a tool for improvement which de-velops the concept of prevention, and also due to market requirements.Different studies analyse the improvements resulting from the imple-mentation of a quality assurance system, emphasising in particular thereduction of costs in companies due to a reduction in non-conformitiesand in the return of products and generally less errors. However, trans-action costs are also reduced due to a decrease in audit, inspection, andlaboratory analysis costs, etc., so that its implementation is important atall stages of the food chain (Bredahl and Holleran, 1997) (Zaibet andBredahl, 1997). Other authors (Schiefer, 1997) consider that ISO 9000provides a basic framework for the organisation, documentation, andcontrol of quality systems which help companies get nearer to achievingthe concept of total quality management.

Nevertheless, in spite of the extensive bibliography on the subject ofquality management in companies, there are very few empirical studieswhich provide data on how companies resolve the problems involved inadopting quality assurance systems. The lack of information is not dueto the disinterest of researchers but rather to the difficulties that a studyof these characteristics poses due to the reticence of businesses when itcomes to providing a certain type of information. Mak et al. (1996) andCaswell et al. (1998) state that it is difficult to measure results due to thetype of information required which, on the one hand, belongs to thecompany and on the other is not sufficient, as variables such as cus-tomer and employee satisfaction, competitiveness, or flexibility are noteasily measurable.

Ma Teresa Maza Rubio and Víctor Ramírez Arias 231

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

33 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

The objective of this study is to analyse the opinions of managers ofcompanies in the Spanish agribusiness sector on factors which, fromtheir point of view, encourage companies to implement quality systemsand those which discourage them from doing so.

The conclusions obtained may be useful to allow an objective evalua-tion of whether or not greater State intervention is needed. This studycomes within the framework of another larger scale study by the FoodAdministration under the Order of 4th July, 1985 of the Ministry of Ag-riculture, Fisheries and Food on Technical Aid Plans for the FoodIndustry.

Evolution in the Number of ISO-Certified Companiesin the Different Agribusiness Subsectors

The first agribusiness company to obtain AENOR ISO 9002 Regis-tered Company certification was Campo Ebro Industrial from AmylumGroup in 1993. In the opinion of the person in charge of its implementa-tion, the main problem was not so much having to correct defects or de-ficiencies but rather having to adopt and put into practice the basicprinciples on which the ISO 9002 norm is based. “ Say what you do, dowhat you say and prove it”. The new activities, internal audits, calibra-tions, preparation and control of documentation, etc., all meant a signif-icant increase in the work load but were successfully implemented(Braña, 1995).

The agribusiness sector accounted for 5.7% of the total number ofISO certificates in Spain in 1999 and five non-agribusiness sectors ac-counted for 45% of ISO certificates: metallurgy, machinery construc-tion, electronic and optical equipment, building and transport (Bergaand González, 1999).

There was a total of 814 ISO 9000-certified food companies in Spainat 31st December, 2000. Table 1 shows the increase in company certifi-cations over the past few years in the Spanish agribusiness sector.

If we analyse the number of certified companies by subsectors, it canbe seen that the meat subsector has the largest number of such compa-nies, which reflects its importance and its economic dimension.

The notable increase in certifications in some subsectors such as fruitand vegetable preparation and canning, fat and oil production and thewine production subsectors, all of which have a clear exporting voca-tion, reveals how useful the adoption of internationally accepted qualityassurance and control systems would be to them.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

33 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

METHODOLOGY

Data was collected during the second semester of 1998 by the mostfrequently used method in this type of study, questionnaires. The ques-tionnaires were not addressed solely to ISO-certified companies (typeA) but were also sent out to companies in the process of implementingan ISO 9000 quality system (type B) and logically in this latter case thequestionnaires were adapted to take this situation into account, to thosewhich were not implementing the system nor intended to at that time(type C) and lastly to quality experts and managers in the agribusinesssector (Table 2).

To handle the questionnaires a database was developed in ACCESS97 Professional Office 97, for Windows 95. The information can be


TABLE 1. Evolution, at a National Level, in the Number of ISO 9000-CertifiedCompanies in Agribusiness Subsectors

Sector/year 1993-1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Total

Meat industry 8 5 15 29 34 45 136

Preparation of fish products - 3 8 9 11 13 44

Fruit canning and bottling industry 4 3 9 17 39 73 145

Production of fats and oils 4 - 4 3 18 16 45

Dairy product industries 1 10 5 7 11 10 44

Milled products and starches 1 2 4 4 5 14 30

Animal feed products 6 4 - 6 5 8 29

Other products 6 11 15 14 16 44 106

Biscuits, bread and cakes - 2 6 10 16 10 44

Sugar industry 4 6 1 1 1 1 14

Cocoa, chocolate and confectionery 1 3 - 2 1 5 12

Coffee, tea and infusions 2 - 2 2 2 5 13

Spices, sauces and condiments 4 4 4 - 2 3 17

Baby food and dietary foods 2 - - - 4 - 6

Production of beverages - 2 4 2 1 6 15

Wine production 11 9 10 14 11 23 78

Beer production 5 1 4 2 - - 12

Water and non-alcoholic beverages 2 5 6 3 4 4 24

Total 61 70 97 125 181 280 814

Source: Ministry Agriculture, fisheries and food in Spain (2001).Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

33 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

viewed globally or depending on each economic activity and the valueof companies’ production.

The questionnaires had a total of 27 questions grouped into four sec-tions and included questions which required both open and yes/no an-swers. Given the wide scope of the study, as has already been mentioned,this article only analyses in depth those aspects which, in the opinion ofthe different heads of companies, encourage or discourage the imple-mentation of quality assurance systems.

The questionnaires sent out to the first group of companies (ISO-cer-tified companies and type A questionnaires) were analysed as, in princi-


TABLE 2. Questionnaires Received According to Economic Activity

CNAE TYPE A TYPE B TYPE C

Meat industry 12 11 30

Preparation and canning of fish and fish products - 8 4

Fish canning 6 5 11

Fruit and vegetable preparation and canning 4 2 4

Production of fruit and vegetable juice 4 4 4

Fruit canning and bottling 7 - 13

Fat and oil production (vegetable and animal) 5 2 13

Production of milk, butter and other dairy products 4 2 6

Production of cheese 2 1 5

Production of milled products 3 1 6

Manufacture of animal feed products 5 - 3

Manufacture of other food products 14 3 14

Production of biscuits, bread and cakes 4 1 12

Sugar industry - - -

Cocoa, chocolate and confectionery industry 2 2 6

Production of coffee, tea and infusions - 1 6

Production of spices, sauces and condiments 2 - 7

Preparation of baby foods and dietary products - - 2

Production of alcoholic beverages 2 - 10

Wine production 13 4 14

Beer production 2 - -

Production of mineral water and non-alcoholic beverages 4 - 12

Total 95 47 182

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

33 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

ple, these companies have most experience given that they have alreadycompleted the implementation process.

The questionnaires were sent out to the 351 agri-foodstuff companieswhich in June 1998, were ISO 9000-certified, and 95 responses were re-ceived.

The questionnaires were analysed and checked to see if they werecorrect; in the event of doubts or missing data, the person who had filledin the questionnaire was telephoned to resolve any deficiencies found.

A multivariate statistical methodology was employed consisting of aPrincipal Components Analysis (PCA), which is widely used in the so-cial science and is useful in revealing the underlying structure of a ma-trix of data which are correlated but not observable at first sight. It isobtained with the smallest number of compound variables known asfactors or components which, given their greater conceptual relevancecan, in later applications, be used to replace the original variables (Hairet al., 2000).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Main Motivating Factors in the Implementation and Certificationof Quality Assurance Systems in the Agribusiness Sector

The question offers a priori three basic reasons for the implementa-tion and certification of a quality system with a fourth option entitled“others” to cover those reasons not mentioned in the first three:

• Organisational reasons• Customer and new market requirements• To increase the company’s competitiveness• Others

The reasons given by companies were basically “Organisational rea-sons” (44.2%) followed by “Customer and new market requirements”(31.5%), and thirdly “To increase the company’s competitiveness”(23.2%) (Figure 1).

In the study carried out by Rubio (1995), two-thirds of the agribusi-ness companies stated that customer requirements were not a motivat-ing factor in the implementation of a quality norm, although this was areason for the remaining companies. This coincides with the responsesobtained in the present study.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

33 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

In relation to “Increase in competitiveness” as a motivating variablethat has been studied, it is worthwhile underlining that its importancewas already pinpointed in the study by Zaibet and Bredhal (1997) in dif-ferent sized food industries in the UK in which all of those questionedstated that ISO certification was the only way to maintain their competi-tive position in the market. In addition to this factor, they included theincrease in efficiency and food safety and enhanced inter- and intra-company communication as motivating factors.

With the companies structured according to value of production, anincrease in competitiveness would seem to be the main reason for thestratum of smaller sized company, with turnovers of less than 12,000million pesetas (except for the 2,000 to 6,000 million peseta stratum). Inlarge-sized companies the percentage of companies which express or-ganisational reasons is the same as the percentage which indicate an in-crease in competitiveness as the motivating factor (Table 3)

Main Discouraging Factors for Implementation in ISO-CertifiedCompanies

The answers obtained to the open question on aspects that are consid-ered to discourage implementation of ISO 9000 standards in companiesin their sector were as follows:

Company culture is cited at the main curb on the implementation of aquality system, followed by the company size and high cost.

The responses given by companies in the different agribusiness sec-tors grouped according to their production value, to the question con-cerning those aspects that discourage the implementation of qualitysystems, are shown in Table 4.


23.2%

31.6%

1.0%

44.2%

ORGANISATIONAL REASONS

CUSTOMER REQUIREMENTS

INCREASE COMPETITIVENESS

OTHERS

FIGURE 1. Reasons for Applying for Certification (%)

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

33 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

From the point of view of the classification of companies accordingto their production value, the aspects which discourage implementationcan be summarised as follows:

• For the smaller companies with a turnover of less than 6,000 mil-lion pesetas, the factors which are most cited are business cultureand high cost. The company size is also an important factor for thesmallest firms (less than 700 million pesetas) and for those withturnovers of between 2,000 and 6,000 million pesetas.


TABLE 3. Reasons for Applying for Certification According to Value of Produc-tion (%)

Value of production(per million)

Organisationalreasons

Customerrequirement

Increase incompetitiveness

Others

Less than 700,000 28.57 28.57 42.85 0

Between 700 and 2,000 26.92 9.23 53.84 0

Between 2,000 and 6,000 45.45 30.30 21.21 3.03

Between 6,000 and 12,000 25.00 16.60 58.30 0

Between 12,000 and 20,000 36.36 27.27 36.36 0

More than 20,000 40.00 20.00 40.00 0

TABLE 4. Aspects Which Discourage the Implementation of Quality Systemsin the ISO-Certified Companies (%)

Variables Totals (%)

Business culture 22.7

Company size 16.5

High costs 15.2

No difference to customers 13.9

Complexity and discipline of the norm 11.3

Large amount of paperwork involved 6.9

Unawareness 4.3

Lack of staff 3.9

No profitable 2.6

Suppliers 2.1

Total 100

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

33 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

• In the intermediate companies with turnovers of between 6,000and 12,000 million pesetas, the complexity and discipline that thenorm entails is seen as the main discouraging factor.

• In the larger companies with a turnover of more than 12,000 mil-lion pesetas, the company size is the most important factor as wellas the business culture (in the 12,000 to 20,000 million pesetasstratum).

In short, it can be said that company size is a discouraging factor forthe implementation of quality assurance systems both for large andsmall companies and that the business culture is also considered to be asignificant curbing factor in most of the strata (see Table 5).

To check if there is a relationship between all of the factors men-tioned by ISO-certified company managers, a Principal ComponentsAnalysis has been carried out taking the different subsectors of the agri-business sector as individuals.

Having calculated the response frequency of each sector to each pos-sible response, the original matrix was constructed. Based on this ma-trix, the analysis initially calculates the matrix of correlations betweenthe variables and Barlett’s and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin’s tests. This allowsus to rule out the possibility that it is an identity matrix and to thus pro-ceed to carrying out the analysis. We have obtained four factors withproper values greater than one, which in total, explains 65% of the total


TABLE 5. Aspects Which Discourage Implementation According to Value ofProduction

Value of Production (per million)

<700 700-2,000 2,000-6,000 6,000-12,000 12,000-20,000 >20,000

Company size 20.8 8.6 20.0 16.6 21.7 21.0

Business culture 20.8 25.8 23.3 16.6 30.4 10.5

High costs 20.8 22.4 21.6 13.3 17.4 15.7

Lack of staff 0 0 5.0 3.3 4.3 10.5

Not profitable 0 5.1 3.3 0 0 0

No difference to customers 20.8 10.3 16.6 16.6 13.0 15.7

Large amount of paperwork 8.3 10.3 5.0 6.6 0 5.2

Complexity and discipline ofnorm

0 10.3 16.6 23.3 4.3 5.2

Suppliers 4.1 3.4 0 0 4.3 5.2

Unawareness 4.1 3.4 5.0 3.3 4.3 10.5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

33 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

variance and in proportions which would advise the analysis of the fourfactors (Table 6 and Figure 2).

The interpretation of the factors based on the correlation of each of themwith the original variables is carried out after having performed a Varimaxrotation and applied Kaiser’s method of normalisation (Table 7).

The first factor explains almost 19% of variance and reveals a highpositive correlation with the “Lack of qualified staff” and “Largeamount of paperwork” variables, whilst there is a lesser, negative corre-lation with the “high cost” variable. This thus points to the difficultiesderiving from a lack of staff trained in quality matters and the quantityof documentation and procedures that the implementation of a qualityassurance system entails. A lack of interest and resources for staff train-


TABLE 6. Explanation of Variance

TOTAL EXPLAINED VARIANCE

Components Total % of Variance Accumulated (%)

1 1.87401385 18.74013855 18.74013855

2 1.74410124 17.44101238 36.18115093

3 1.4772854 14.772854 50.95400494

4 1.40602337 14.06023369 65.01423863

Extraction method: Principal Components Analysis

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

.5

0.0

EIG

EN

VA

LUE

S

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

FACTORS

FIGURE 2. Graphic Representation of the Proper ValuesDow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

33 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

ing and a lack of time to document activities have also been previouslyhighlighted as factors which discourage the implementation of qualityassurance system in the agribusiness sector (Rubio, 1995).

With regards to the excessive amount of paperwork, this is an aspectthat has been frequently mentioned in relation to said norms and whichhas been improved by the modifications to ISO 9000 norms carried outin 2000 (Berga and González, 2000).

The second factor explains a percentage of variance which is similarto the first (17%) and reveals a high correlation with the “Suppliers”variable (this variable refers to the difficulties that companies have inobtaining suppliers that can satisfy the requirements of the standard)and with the “Unawareness” and “Not profitable” variables. It is alsonegatively correlated to the “Company size” variable. Pajares (1995)underlined the importance of evaluating and selecting the supplier ac-cording to whether or not the said supplier is certified, and that this iseven more important if both the customer and supplier are in the agri-business sector. Carballo (1996) highlighted the pressure that large buy-ing centres, hypermarkets, etc., exert on their suppliers, not only in pricematters (in a global sense: prices, payment conditions, discounts, etc.)but also in relation to the quality of the products acquired and theadvantage of being ISO-certified.

The low level of awareness and application of the norm, regardless ofthe size of the company has also been indicated in previous works(Pajares, 1995) carried out in the agribusiness sector.


TABLE 7. Rotated Component Matrix

Components

1 2 3 4

Lack of staff 0,859 0,016 �0,231 �0,197

Large amount of paperwork 0,808 �0,125 0,422 �0,042

High cost 0,614 0,087 0,231 �0,270

Suppliers 0,137 0,761 �0,299 0,145

Unawareness �0,257 0,668 0,070 �0,247

Not profitable �0,068 0,618 0,093 0,525

Company size 0,064 0,543 �0,357 0,118

No difference to customers �0,034 0,094 0,769 �0,057

Complexity and discipline of norm 0,105 0,074 0,606 �0,359

Business culture 0,020 �0,063 0,055 0,888

Rotation method: Varimax with Kaiser’s normalisation

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

33 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

The third and fourth factors explain a similar percentage of the vari-ance (around 14%). The third factor shows a high positive correlationwith the “No difference to customers” variable and a negative correla-tion with the “Complexity and discipline of the norm” variable so that itcould be interpreted as a factor which would indicate commercial prob-lems and not an intrinsic problem of the company itself.

Lastly, the fourth factor is very highly correlated with the “Businessculture” variable which would point to a lack of business culture in mat-ters concerning quality as the main factor curbing implementation. Theimportance of totally assuming the basic principles of the norm and ofthe participation of all areas of the company, particularly management,has been widely discussed by different authors (Braña, 1995; Ramírez,1995; Martínez, 1996; and García, 1996).

Figure 3 shows the positions of the variables in relation to the axeswhich is very useful for interpreting the meaning of the factors.

From the results obtained it can be concluded that the first and fourthfactors point to internal company problems that derive from the impli-cations that the application of ISO norms have for the company. Com-panies do indeed require specialised staff or at least staff with training inthe new concepts of quality management, a business culture that is inline with quality and total quality concepts, and this sometimes gener-ates an excessive amount of paperwork.


Component 2

Component 1 Component 3

1.0

.5

0.0

–.5

1.0

.50.0

–.5 –.50.0

.51.0

Supp

Unaware. .

Not prof.

Staff Bureac.Norm Culture

No difference

Costs

Size

FIGURE 3. Components in the Rotated Space

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

33 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Factors two and three, on the other hand, represent curbs to imple-mentation that derive from a business environment which is not yetadapted to the outline of ISO 9000 quality. In factor 2 the lack of suppli-ers that fulfil, the norm is related to unawareness, and factor 3 points tothe norm making no difference to customers.

CONCLUSIONS

1. The main reasons for implementing and certifying quality assur-ance systems, given by the companies that responded to the ques-tionnaire, were “organisational reasons” (44.2%), followed by“customer and new market requirements” (32%). This latter per-centage coincides with that indicated by other authors. An in-crease in competitiveness would seem to be the main reasonamongst the smaller-sized companies.

2. The business culture is the main discouraging factor for the imple-mentation of a quality system followed, in order of importance, bythe size of the company and the high cost. However, whilst thebusiness culture is an important discouraging factor regardless ofturnover, the company size would seem to be a greater discourag-ing factor for the largest and the smallest companies.

3. A deeper analysis of the factors which discourage implementationreveals that there is a set of internal problems in the companiesthemselves deriving from a lack of qualified staff or lack of busi-ness culture; the large amount of paperwork involved; externalproblems which derive from the lack of suppliers that fulfil thenorm; a lack of awareness; and the fact that the norm does not dif-ferentiate them amongst customers.

REFERENCES

Badía, A. (1998). Calidad : enfoque ISO 9000. Bilbao: Ediciones Deusto.Berga, A. & González, M. (1999). Certificación de la calidad en las industrias ali-

mentarias. Cárnica 2000, Abril, 104-105.Berga, A. & González, M. (2000). Calidad 2000: reto o compromiso. Eurocarne, 83

Enero-Febrero, 107-114.Braña, P. (1995). Calidad e ISO 9000. Qualitas Hodie, 14 Febrero, 13-14.Bredahl, M.E., & Holleran, E. (1997). Food safety, transaction costs and institutional

innovation. In proceedings of the 49th Seminar of the EAAE, Quality managementand improvement for competitive advantage in agriculture and food (volume 1) (pp.51-67). Bonn, Germany, (February 19-21).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

33 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

Carballo, S. (1996). Errores en la interpretación del A.R.C.P.C. y las normas ISO 9000.Qualitas Hodie, 27 Junio-Julio, 21-23.

Caswell, A. Julie, M.E. Bredhal, and N.H Hooker (1998). How Quality Metasystemsare Affecting the Food Industry. Review of Agricultural Economics, 20 (2), Fall/Winter, 547-557.

García, R. (1996). La certificación en la industria cárnica. Eurocarne, 44 Marzo, 39-43.Green, G. Dennis (1997). ISO 9000 Quality Systems Auditing. Cambridge:University

Press.Hair, J.F.; Anderson, R.E.; Tatham, R.L. y Black, W.C. (2000). Análisis multivariante.

Madrid: Prentice Hall.Ho, M.K. Samuel (1995). Is the ISO 9000 Series for Total Quality Management?. In-

ternational Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 25 (1),51-66.

Hooker, H. Neal, C. Capmany, T. Ozuna, Jr, and A. Tilburg (1999). A marketing Toolfor U.S. Agribusiness. A paper submitted to the International Food and Agribusi-ness Management Review. 1 June.

Johnson, L. Perry (1998). ISO/QS 9000 Yearbook. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.Mak, Y.T., S. Carr, and J. Needham (1996). Differences in Strategy, Quality Manage-

ment Practices and Performance Reporting Systems Between ISO Accredited andnon-ISO Accredited Companies. SSRN Electronic Paper Collection. http://papers.Ssrn.com. 5 December.

M.A.P.A (1999). Gestión de la calidad en la industria alimentaria. Madrid.M.A.P.A (2001). La Agricultura, la Pesca y la Alimentación en España, 2000. Madrid.Martínez González, M. (1996). Un sistema de calidad integrador, eficaz y generador de

sinergias. Qualitas Hodie, 27 Junio-Julio, 15-16.Mumma, G.; Allen, A.J. y Couvillion, W.C. (2000). An analysis of Selected Perfor-

mance Indicators for U.S. Agribusiness Sites Registered to ISO 9000 Series of Stan-dards. Journal of Food Distribution Research, 31 (1), March, 225-235.

Pajares, C. (1995). Certificación alimentaria. Boletín ISO, pp. 17-59.Ramírez, I. (1995). Las ISO 9000 y el sector alimentario. Qualitas Hodie, 14 Febrero,

26-27.Rubio, L.A. (1995). Industrias alimentarias e ISO 9000. Qualitas Hodie, 14 Febrero,

20-22.Schiefer, G. (1997). Total quality management and quality assurance in Agriculture

and food. In proceedings of the 49th Seminar of the EAAE, Quality managementand improvement for competitive advantage in agriculture and food (volume 1) (pp.139-156). Bonn, Germany, (February 19-21).

Zaibet, L. & Bredahl, M. (1997). Gains from ISO Certification in the UK meat sector.Agribusiness, 13 (4), 375-384.

SUBMITTED: October 2002FIRST REVISION: February 2003

SECOND REVISION: March 2004ACCEPTED: July 2004


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

33 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

study of the main motivations and discouraging factors for the implementation of iso 9000 standards...

Documents