Search results

1 – 3 of 3
Open Access
Article
Publication date: 27 February 2023

Emilia Filippi, Loris Gaio and Marco Zamarian

This study aims to analyze how the interplay between hard and soft elements of total quality management (TQM) produces the conditions for sustaining success in the quest for…

1120

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to analyze how the interplay between hard and soft elements of total quality management (TQM) produces the conditions for sustaining success in the quest for quality.

Design/methodology/approach

A qualitative analysis (Gioia method) was carried out on an original dataset collected through both direct and indirect methods (i.e. archival sources, interviews and observations) to generate a new interpretive framework.

Findings

The interpretative framework identifies four categories of elements: trigger elements create the starting conditions for a quality virtuous cycle; benchmarking tools set the standards of performance; improvement tools enable exploration of the space of possible alternative practices and finally, catalytic forces allow the institutionalization of effective techniques discovered in this search process into new standards.

Research limitations/implications

The findings the authors present in this paper are derived by a single case study, limiting the generalizability of our results in other settings.

Practical implications

This study has three implications: first, the design of trigger elements is critical for the success of any TQM initiative; second, the interplay of improvement and benchmarking tools at several levels should be coherent and third, to exploit the potential of TQM, efforts should be devoted to the dissemination of new effective practices by means of catalyzing elements.

Originality/value

The model provides a more specific understanding of the nature and purpose of the hard and soft elements of TQM and the dynamic interaction between the two classes of elements over time.

Details

The TQM Journal, vol. 36 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1754-2731

Keywords

Open Access
Article
Publication date: 5 December 2022

Karen Handley and Courtney Molloy

This paper takes a structured literature review (SLR) approach to identify gaps in the literature and suggest future research opportunities. It focuses on corporate governance…

2171

Abstract

Purpose

This paper takes a structured literature review (SLR) approach to identify gaps in the literature and suggest future research opportunities. It focuses on corporate governance (CG) performed outside the formal board of directors’ structure and examines research of alternative CG of small and medium-sized entities (SMEs).

Design/methodology/approach

The authors use the SLR method to search the Scopus database, extracting and synthesising findings relating specifically to SMEs’ CG. These are tabulated and described using bibliometric software.

Findings

The authors highlight an absence of tailored theoretical approaches to understanding CG in SMEs, which differs from the governance of larger entities. They also find evidence of alternative governance structures in SME CG.

Research limitations/implications

Further research should embrace management and other theoretical perspectives and expanded methodologies, nuances in understanding offered in contextualised settings and awareness of practical implications to better understand the specific setting of CG in SMEs.

Practical implications

SMEs seek to access the scarce resources and skills external to their formal CG structures. Regulators and resource providers should mobilise facilitation and training for this expansion.

Originality/value

The authors synthesise a large body of literature to extract findings specific to SMEs. A unique contribution is our focus on alternative forms of CG in SMEs. Evidence of alternative boards points to resolutions for human capital shortages in SMEs.

Details

Meditari Accountancy Research, vol. 30 no. 7
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 2049-372X

Keywords

Open Access
Article
Publication date: 3 October 2022

Goran Vlasic

As family and nonfamily businesses differ in how they do business, the focus of this manuscript is on understanding how strategy-level models can be misinterpreted if family…

2022

Abstract

Purpose

As family and nonfamily businesses differ in how they do business, the focus of this manuscript is on understanding how strategy-level models can be misinterpreted if family involvement is not considered. Thus, in this manuscript, the focus is on understanding the extent to which strategic orientations (market orientation and technology orientation, which reflect strategic approach), strategic performance metric focus (financial-based, optimization-based and market-based, which reflect strategy evaluations) and strategic audacity (which reflects boldness in envisioning and delivering strategic outcomes) play a role in driving firm performance – in family businesses vs nonfamily businesses. Understanding how these drivers impact performance differently in family vs nonfamily businesses enables companies to better direct their strategic efforts.

Design/methodology/approach

After presenting theoretical concepts, authors use regression analysis on a sample of companies in a developing European Union (EU) country (n = 282) to evaluate the impact of strategic orientation, strategic performance metric focus and strategic audacity on firm performance separately in three samples: the full sample (consisting of both family and nonfamily-owned firms), sample of family businesses and the sample of nonfamily businesses.

Findings

The role of strategic orientation, strategic audacity and focal goals in driving firm performance differs depending on the company type (family vs nonfamily). In the case of nonfamily businesses, strategic audacity and technology orientation with the focus on efficiencies and markets are driving firm performance. In the case of family businesses, both market and technology orientation are important drivers of performance; the focus on financial and market indicators of performance is positively impacting performance, while the focus on efficiency indicators is diminishing the performance of family businesses. Thus, results show that of the performance drivers for family businesses, some are insignificant (strategic audacity), while some even have a negative impact (focus on optimization-based measures of performance) on family businesses' performance. Moreover, results show that some of the drivers of performance in case of family businesses (market orientation and focus on financial-based measures of performance) are not drivers of outstanding performance in the case of nonfamily businesses.

Practical implications

Best practices differ for family vs nonfamily businesses. In case of family businesses, comparing them to nonfamily businesses, market orientation and the focus on financial-based measures of performance have a greater impact on firm performance, while, at the same time, family businesses should refrain focusing on pursuing optimization-based measures of performance as such pursuit drives down their performance. Understanding the drivers of performance specific to family businesses will enable such firms to better navigate contexts characterized by ambiguity and uncertainty.

Originality/value

The manuscript evaluates how models, generally researched in the overall firm metrics, differ between family businesses and nonfamily businesses, thus delivering new insights into the important marketing concepts.

Details

Journal of Family Business Management, vol. 13 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 2043-6238

Keywords

1 – 3 of 3