Quality management, environmental management and firm performance: a review of empirical studies and issues of integration
Download 276.85 Kb. View original pdf
|
| QM, EM and firm performance 198 © 2008 The Authors Journal compilation © 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and British Academy of Management Powell 1995; Samson and Terziovski 1999). Firms that implement QM focus on providing superior value to the customer and on improving the efficiency of the processes. Continuous improvement of processes and product quality leads to increased revenues (through product reliability) and reduced costs (through process efficiency. Customer satisfaction leads to increased revenues because it enables the firm to gain a market advantage (Anderson et al. 1995; Kaynak 2003; York and Miree 2004). Similarly, EM may affect firm performance positively (Al-Tuwaijri et al. 2004; Hart and Ahuja 1996; King and Lenox 2002; Klassen and McLaughlin This positive effect may result from the positive impact on firm costs and differentiation levels. Pollution prevention can allow savings in input and energy consumption and increase the demand of environmentally sensitive consumers (Hart 1997; Miles and Covin These business practices are increasingly being adopted by firms, very often jointly (Karapetrovic and Willborn 1998; Wilkinson and Dale 1999a). In fact, EM offers a striking parallel with QM (Klassen and McLaughlin 1996; Kleiner A long-term goal of both QM and EM is to move towards a proactive, preventive stance. This consists of improving product design, technology-related decisions, the manufacturing process as a whole and customer service. Moreover, the QM goal of zero defects parallels closely the no waste aim of EM-based systems. Quality management focuses on waste as it applies to the inefficiency of processes, whereas EM focuses more on pollution in the form of air emissions and solid and hazardous waste. Other purposes of implementation of QM (Kaynak 2003; Quazi and Padibjo 1998; Singels et al. 2001; York and Miree 2004) and EM (González-Benito and González-Benito 2005; Poksinska et al. 2003; Quazi et al. 2001) are related to increase in productivity, quality improvement, environmental improvement, reduction in costs and waste, increase in sales and market share, customer retention and an improved image. Accordingly, two types of purpose and benefit maybe suggested in both systems. These purposes maybe internal and external. Internal purposes are related to the impact of those internal functions in an organization that address process improvement (e.g. increasing productivity, improving quality and friendliness to the environment, reducing costs and waste. External purposes are related to the effects of QM and EM on customer satisfaction, other stakeholders and demands (e.g. improvements with respect to quality and friendliness to the environmental may result in an improved corporate image, increased marketing advantage and adaptation to the requirement of customers and other stakeholders). Similarly, an examination of the literature on QM (e.g. Flynn et al. 1994; Kaynak 2003; Saraph et al. 1989) and EM (e.g. Corbett and Cutler 2000; Curkovic 2003; Klassen and McLaughlin 1993) reveals that QM and EM systems have common implementation practices (e.g. leadership, training, and permanent self- assessment and improvement). Because the two systems share similar purposes and implementation factors, it makes sense to use many of the tools, methods and practices of QM when implementing an EM system. Thus, significant benefits are bound to derive from applying what has been learnt about QM to environmental issues (Curkovic 2003; Epstein 1996; Klassen and McLaughlin Makower 1993; May and Flannery 1995; Rondinelli and Berry 1997; Sarkis and Rasheed 1995; Wheeler 1992; Willig Woods 1993). In fact, the gradual evolution of quality includes taking into account environment- related factors, and that the concept of QM is being carried over into the field of environmental practices, as several authors had anticipated (Curkovic 2003; Epstein 1996; Klassen and McLaughlin 1993; May and Flannery 1995; Mizuno 1988; Sarkis and Rasheed Moreover, QM measures are more developed than EM measures. Using these ideas and the similarities between QM and EM, the QM dimensions can serve to identify EM and integrated management systems dimensions. For the purpose of analysing QM and EM, along with their effects on firm performance, |