Differences in Strategy, Quality Management Practices and Performance Reporting Systems between ISO Accredited and Non-Iso Accredited Companies
Posted: 18 Aug 1997
Date Written: February 1996
In recent years, an increasing number of organisations are obtaining ISO accreditation. Although ISO accreditation may reflect an organisation's pursuit of a quality-focused business strategy and a commitment to quality management practices, ISO accreditation may merely be a response to external (customers') demands for quality certification. This study investigates whether ISO accredited companies differ from non-ISO accredited companies in business strategy and in their implementation of quality management practices. It also investigates differences in the reporting of physical quality, financial quality, and traditional efficiency-based performance measures between ISO accredited and non-ISO accredited companies.
Based on a mail questionnaire sent to a sample of ISO and non-ISO accredited New Zealand manufacturing companies, the results showed a significant difference in the business strategy pursued by the two groups, with ISO accredited companies regarding quality as more important than cost efficiencies. However, there was no significant difference in the quality management practices of ISO accredited and non-ISO accredited companies, except in the areas of process improvement and quality measurement. There was also little evidence of differences in performance reporting systems between ISO accredited and non-ISO accredited companies.
JEL Classification: M40, M46, L23
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation