Employees’ involvement and quality improvement in ...employees’ awareness, and fostering employees’ full involvement in quality programs. Moreover, the research tested if general

African Journal of Business Management Vol. 6(23), pp. 6980-6996, 13 June, 2012 Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/AJBM DOI: 10.5897/AJBM12.234 ISSN 1993-8233 ©2012 Academic Journals

Full Length Research Paper

Employees’ involvement and quality improvement in manufacturing small and medium enterprise (SME): A

comparative analysis

Luis Mendes

Business and Economics Department, CEFAGE Research Centre (CEFAGE-UBI), University of Beira Interior, Portugal. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]. Tel: +351275319619. Fax: +351275319601.

Accepted 28 February, 2012

The research focused on specific human resource management (HRM) issues, driven at raising employees’ awareness, and fostering employees’ full involvement in quality programs. Moreover, the research tested if general HRM initiatives directed at quality improvement, and quality training programs, in particular, assumed different preponderances in small and medium enterprise (SME), according to firms’ size. For this purpose, a survey was mailed to a random sample of Portuguese SME. From the sample, around 16% of questionnaires were completed and returned. The results suggest clear concerns from SME in raising employees’ awareness about the importance of quality improvement issues, and fostering employees’ involvement in quality improvement programs. Furthermore, regarding quality improvement, differences in attitude towards HRM initiatives, in general, and training, in particular, are attributed to organizational size. Key words: Human resource management (HRM), training and development, quality improvement, employees‟ involvement, organizational size.

INTRODUCTION Recently, important changes in industry‟s competitive edge have been putting strong pressures on continuous improvement needs, accelerating breakthrough in quality management issues. As a result, over last years, many organizations (small, medium sized, large, from industry, from services) have embraced total quality management (TQM) as the management philosophy that rules their strategic planning. At the same time, literature focused on TQM has been growing in the last decades.

Several authors (Baird et al., 2011; Fuentes-Fuentes et al., 2006; Prajogo and Sohal, 2006) have been “preaching” its importance for firms‟ performance, as a way to improve competitiveness; others (Blanco-Callejo and Gutierrez-Broncano, 2010; Talib et al., 2011), studied how TQM has been applied in different kinds of organizations and/or different economic contexts; many of them (Soltani et al., 2008) searched for the main negative factors behind the lack of success of TQM‟ implementation in several cases; some of them (Bayazit and Karpak, 2007; Issac et al., 2004) attempted to develop frameworks for TQM‟s development in different

kinds of organizations (very small firms, SME, large companies) and/or different economic sectors (both industries and services). In fact, several researches (Lakhe and Mohanty, 1994; Seetharaman et al., 2006) have been conducted over a couple of decades, attempting to clarify TQM‟s concept, exploring empirically the theory behind the philosophy and looking for the main critical success factors in its principles‟ implementation.

Through a thorough analysis of literature published essentially by the quality gurus and other quality issues experts, the pioneer study carried out by Saraph et al. (1989) performed a previous extraction of one hundred and twenty organizational prescriptions for an effective TQM implementation and subsequently clustered them into eight categories of critical success factors (CSF), defining these, as critical issues in managerial planning/action that must be practiced to achieve an effective quality management. The main aim of this study was later pursued by several authors approaching this issue through different methodologies or replicating the framework in different cultures/countries (Zairi, 2005;

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Rahman, 2001; Dow et al., 1999; Yusof and Aspinwall, 1999; Tamimi, 1998; Black and Porter, 1996; Miller, 1996; Zairi, 1996; Ahire et al., 1995; Badri et al., 1995; Kasul and Motwani, 1995; Powell, 1995; Tamimi and Gershon, 1995; Watson and Korukonda, 1995; Flynn et al., 1994; Easton, 1993; Porter and Parker, 1993; Ramirez and Loney, 1993). As observed through a literature review, independently of methodologies used, organizations studied, or geographical focus, the majority agreed that employees‟ involvement/ commitment is a key factor for TQM‟s successful implementation.

The main aim of this research was on a set of concerns regarding human resource (HR) initiatives focused on employees‟ commitment and quality awareness, developed in smaller firms. These concerns gave rise to the research‟s main focus and were materialized through the following purposes: (i) to study HR initiatives focused on employees‟ commitment and con-sciousness/awareness about the importance of quality improvement in firms‟ competitiveness; (ii) to compare employees‟ attitudes toward specific issues related to quality improvement, in SMEs; (iii) to test if SME‟ dimension influence, somehow, initiatives developed towards employees‟ commitment and quality awareness. LITERATURE REVIEW Employees’ involvement in total quality management (TQM) According to Pun and Chin (1999), TQM added a new dimension to quality management issues: the redefinition of quality from the customer's viewpoint, based on marketplace evidences. As stressed by the authors, through such dramatic shift in perspective, quality may be seen as a powerful competitive weapon and included in firms‟ strategic planning. In fact, as highlighted by Brah et al. (2002), TQM cannot be seen as a quick fix way, stressing that its success involves a long-term paradigm shift through significant organizational changes.

Over the last few decades several holistic management philosophies, involving extensive change processes (total quality management, business reengineering, lean management), have been emphasizing employees‟ role, through an increased participation in the process for change. In fact, the influence of employees‟ involvement in firms‟ changing processes has been extensively reported in both academic and practitioner journals which strongly highlight its importance and potential on organizational changes (Welikala and Sohal, 2008; Sun et al., 2000; Chiu, 1998; Wilkinson, 1998; Dale et al., 1997; Hackman and Wageman, 1995; Marchington, 1995) through personal involvement on problem-solving and decision-making. As enhanced by Gunasekaran et al. (1998) and Kanji (1990), among others, Total quality management may be defined as a management

Mendes 6981 philosophy based on people and with a strong emphasis on continuous improvement seeking to achieve total quality through a full participation of everyone in organizations. Deming (1986) and other quality gurus have characterized human resources‟ (HR) management as a significant driver of total quality management‟s implementation, emphasizing its implications in quality continuous improvement. Wilkinson (1995) defined it as a model focused on total customer satisfaction, through employees‟ high involvement in decision making. In fact, as stressed by Welikala and Sohal (2008), employees‟ involvement in decision making is intrinsically at the heart of the TQM concept. As stressed by Pun et al. (2001), the terms `employee involvement‟ and `participative management‟ are often used interchangeably. Thus, as suggest by the authors, to avoid confusion, this paper also used “employee involvement” as a generic concept that group all common features of both terms.

Pun et al. (2001) highlighted that employees‟ involvement may provide the foundation for quality efforts and strategy development, and ensure that practices implemented conform to quality requirements that are followed by everyone in the organization. According to Van der Wiele et al. (1997), TQM‟s acceptance as a managerial philosophy, brought significant human resources implications. As stressed by Welikala and Sohal (2008), the literature focused on TQM suggested that the low success rates of many TQM programs was due to a lack of emphasis on HR issues (leadership, training, participative management, rewarding and appraisal systems, decision-making process). Tamimi and Sebastianelli (1998) observed that almost half of barriers for successful TQM programs‟ implementation were related to people. TQM‟s advocates, like Pun and Chin (1999), usually highlight that the more organizations apply employee involvement initiatives, the more positive results they will gain, and the more profitable and competitive they will become, through higher employee satisfaction, and quality of life at work, among other factors. As stressed by Kochan et al. (1995), human resources management issues, may result in significant differences between performance indexes in organizations with similar capabilities. Such evidences were corroborated by other researchers. As found by Powell (1995) employees‟ empowerment was significantly correlated with overall corporate performance. Dow et al. (1999) concluded that workforce commitment had a significant positive association with organizational performance. O‟Brien (1995) observed that higher productivity and efficiency may be reached through employees‟ empowerment. According to Dale et al. (1997), results suggest a positive correlation between high employee involvement and companies‟ productivity and long-term financial performance.

Dale et al. (1997) emphasized that employees are in the best position both to recognize problems and to find improvements, if they are interested, and sufficiently

6982 Afr. J. Bus. Manage. empowered to take steps to make improvements. As highlighted by Shearer (1996), employees‟ empowerment and awareness about quality challenges facilitate their participation towards continuous quality improvement. In fact, as stressed by Pfeffer (1998), people-based strategies requires more than cosmetic changes, implying high commitment in doing things differently, such as training employees in multiple skills, organizing workers in teams, instituting suggestion systems, organizing problems‟ solving mechanisms like quality circles, and so forth. As highlighted by Besterfield et al. (1999), the core objective of TQM is to guarantee that every employee is conscious that he belongs to an internal continuous chain of customer-supplier relationships and that his full involvement is essential for quality improvement. Training and development needs Employees‟ empowerment and involvement at all levels is important to gain competitive advantages and business overall success. As enhanced by Pace (1989), employees‟ empowerment and involvement is crucial to problem solving and therefore to quality continuous improvement, since employees involved and focused in their job, at their level, are in the best position to make decisions to have control over processes‟ improvement. Bayazit‟s (2003) research, based on a survey conducted on 250 Turkish organizations, enhanced that, among other factors, employees‟ involvement/commitment, and quality training and development are key factors for TQM‟s successful implementation. Increasingly, companies‟ shift toward philosophies focused on quality continuous improvement like TQM, lead firms to develop and implement initiatives directed at employees‟ training and development.

According to Ross (1993), higher involvement means, more responsibility, which requires specific skills, generally reached through training and development programs. In fact, it is believed that training and development programs are powerful agents both to develop personal capabilities and skills, and to improve firms‟ growth/profitability. Juran and Gryna (1993) stressed that training and development are a key factor in any quality continuous improvement program, enhancing that employees should be provided with the main skills and knowledge compatible with the role they are concerned with, searching higher commitment levels towards quality improvement, and in the last instance, higher levels of efficiency and effectiveness.

Customers‟ increasing expectations and requests regarding quality, and competition‟s price sensitivity, characterizing the global market arena where SME are competing, have been reinforcing the importance of human factors, strengthening the need for effective training and development initiatives focused on quality improvement, as a means of reaching sustainable

competitive advantages. In fact, several researches‟ results enhanced that a trained and developed workforce is a key factor in quality continuous improvement programs (Hansson and Klefsjo, 2003; Sohal et al., 1998; Dale et al., 1997). As stressed by Dale et al. (1997), training and development in quality management issues may improve employees‟ abilities/skills, allowing organizations to promote employees‟ commitment and foster workforce‟s quality awareness. As enhanced throughout literature, developing extensive training programs seems to benefit employees‟ overall performance, providing them with the skills needed for effectively implementing quality and productivity improvement initiatives. Based on a meta-analysis focused on the results of human resources programs on employees‟ performance, Guzzo et al. (1985) concluded that training has a positive impact on employees‟ individual productivity. Based on their research, Delaney and Huselid (1996) concluded that training was significantly related to organizational performance. Chandler and McEvoy (2000) highlighted that a total quality management strategy was most effective when supported by significant training, founding support for the frequently claimed prescription that more training is helpful in TQM‟s implementation, since there is a strong commitment to TQM‟ principles, otherwise investment and commitment to training will not have significant impact on firms‟ earnings. Human resource (HR) initiatives directed at quality improvement in small and medium enterprise (SME) As already referred, several researches have been looking for key factors, crucial for a successful TQM principles implementation. Unfortunately most of these focused essentially on large firms and few paid special attention to smaller firms. According to Yusof and Aspinwall (1999), both realities are quite different, but some key dimensions are common to both types of firms, enhancing HR management and training/education. However, as stressed by Yusof and Aspinwall (1999), among other researchers, comparing with larger firms, SME face particular problems which may hinder their progress through TQM, namely regarding capital, human and technical resources.

Existing management literature acknowledges that there are significant operational differences between SME and large firms, and researchers concerned with organizational size noticed that what applies to larger organizations may not apply to SME (Pun and Jaggernath-Furlonge, 2012). In fact, researchers like Hansson and Klefsjo (2003), Yusof and Aspinwall (1999), and Price and Chen (1993), among others, pointed out that some characteristics of quality management are suitable to smaller firms, while other are more in line with larger organizations, highlighting that TQM

principles such as employee participation, flexibility, and closeness to customers could be more successfully applied in smaller firms than in larger ones. In fact, small firms are generally characterized by a lean structure based on a direct and close link between top management and employees at the lower level in the hierarchical structure; as a result, SME may benefit from a higher flexibility, a higher customer orientation, and a faster decision-making process (Prasad and Tata, 2009; Lee, 2004; Ghobadian and Gallear, 1997; Ahire and Golhar, 1996; Azzone and Cainarca, 1993). As highlighted by Roca-Puig et al. (2006), smaller firms‟ social subsystem (people management) may provide greater values compared with large firms‟ realities.

However, according to Noci (1996), although small firms may benefit from special advantages, they also face significant difficulties that may hinder quality improvement efforts. Researchers argue that small firms lack clout with suppliers (Noci, 1996; Azzone and Cainarca, 1993), lack sufficient financial resources (Prasad and Tata, 2009; Azzone and Cainarca, 1993; Noci, 1996; Carson, 1985; Gunasekaran et al., 1997), lack specialist skills (Gadenne and Sharma, 2009; Conti, 1993; Carson, 1985; Wilkes and Dale, 1998), lack necessary information channels to keep up to date with developments in quality (Conti, 1993), lack professional managerial expertise (Conti, 1993; Wilkes and Dale, 1998), and rely mostly on short-term goals, possibly meaning that they lack long-term quality improvement plans (Gunasekaran et al., 1997). In fact, as stressed by Noci (1996), most of SME‟ long-term strategies are based on orders from larger organizations.

Regarding specifically HR management like training and development, researchers worried about the effects of firms‟ dimension on human resources management noted that differences in attitude towards employee training may be attributed to firm‟s dimension. In fact, it seems that, as firm size generally increases, more formal training and development programs may be provided. As highlighted throughout literature, as firms grow, training and development initiatives turn to be more structured and formal (Barrett and Mayson, 2007), being usually delegated to specialists inside or outside the firm (Kotey and Slade, 2005; Hornsby and Kuratko, 1990). For example, Roberts et al. (1992) enhanced that frontiers for informality may be perceived in firms above 20 employees. Jennings and Beaver (1997) complete such observation referring that beyond such limit most owners becomes overloaded and seek to delegate responsibilities toward a management more professional.

Several researchers, like Reid and Harris (2002) revealed that most successful SME provide more employees‟ training and development programs than the average. However, despite the perceived importance of training and development for improvements in productivity, and for firms‟ sustained competitive advantage, expressed throughout literature, authors like Kotey and Folker (2007), and Storey (2004), observed

Mendes 6983 that there is a general reluctance among SME to provide formal employee training. In fact several reasons have been pointed out throughout literature, in order to try to explain such perception.

Storey (1994) highlighted that difficulties felt in establishing a direct and positive relation between training and performance may hinder owner-managers from investing in employees‟ involvement initiatives, and formal training programs. As noted by Reid and Harris (2002), and McEvoy (1984), among others, owner-managers in smaller firms perceive generally formal training as an investment firms can hardly afford, attending both to course fees and also to costs inherent to outputs reduction while employees are off-the-job. In fact, smaller organizations generally lack needed resources and expertise, and, as a result face great difficulties to gain economies of scale (Moreno-Luzon, 1993; Kotey and Sheridan, 2001; Chandler and McEvoy, 2000; Klaas et al., 2000). Westhead and Storey (1996), also highlighted that formal training may not be provided because benefits would be underestimated by small firm managers; as stressed by the authors, training and development‟s benefits are usually gained in the long-term, turning investments in such initiatives unattractive to SME, since these operate generally in a short time horizon. Furthermore, Westhead and Storey (1996), still add that with reduced accesses to information, smaller firms are frequently unaware about training and development programs available and respective costs and benefits. Another handicap, enhanced throughout literature (Kotey and Folker, 2007), deals with difficulties felt by firms to maintain the employees more qualified, due to lack of internal promotion opportunities, characterizing SME, losing trained employees for competitors. Finally, as stressed by MacMahon and Murphy (1999), as SME‟ strategic orientation lays upon flexibility, among other factors, owner-managers enhance difficulties felt to balance needs between highly specialized employees, as opposed to a multi-skilled workforce consistent with jobs flexible nature in SME.

As stressed by Lee and Oakes (1995), smaller organizations usually recognize the need for training; however, most of these do not have a clear understanding about what is required and lack resources to carry out effective training programs. As a result, as highlighted by Hill and Stewart (2000), SME lack systematic approaches to employees‟ training and development programs which are usually qualified as informal, unplanned, reactive, and short-term oriented. MacMahon and Murphy (1999) observed that smaller firms seldom perform formal training needs analyses. As stressed by Hill and Stewart (2000), smaller firms focus essentially on informal training and development initiatives since these can be easily integrated into daily operations, are centered on employees‟ specific needs, and involve lower costs. According to Gibb (1997), informal training is often qualified as reactive rather than

6984 Afr. J. Bus. Manage. proactive. As stressed by Mabey and Thomson (2001), in smallest firms, where the owner-manager may have a direct control over work performance, training and development initiatives are essentially provided on-the-job. According to Smith et al. (2002), on-the-job training and development initiatives allow employees to learn, be integrated in the real context, where skills are daily used. Furthermore, as enhanced in literature, training programs in smaller firms are essentially developed on-the-job paying little attention to employee development (Loan-Clarke et al., 1999; Marlow and Patton, 1993).

METHODOLOGICAL PROCEDURES Research’s purposes This study was developed as part of a wider research project (PhD Thesis) conducted under the scope of how Portuguese manufacturing SME cope with quality improvement issues and how their relationship, with the main stakeholders, foster/hinder efforts developed toward quality continuous improvement. In fact, as been highlighted earlier, management literature suggests significant operational differences between SME and large firms, stressing that, what can be applied to large companies may not be suitable to SME. However, regarding quality management issues, few researches focused specifically on comparative analyses between SME and larger firms, and even less between small firms and medium-sized ones. This may correspond to a sensitive gap in literature, attending to the great direct impact SME have in economies in most of European countries, through outputs and employment provided. Furthermore, most economies are also influenced indirectly through SME‟s power on larger firms‟ performance, since quality improvement efforts‟ success in larger organizations depends highly on suppliers‟ quality improvement success, and frequently most of these suppliers are small or medium-sized firms. Thus, researches focused specifically on quality concerns in SME may represent a field where research can expand.

Furthermore, the literature review enhanced the importance of employees‟ involvement in quality continuous improvement issue, and highlighted that training and development initiatives focused on quality management issues may be important to promote employees‟ commitment and foster workforce‟s quality awareness, key factors in any quality continuous improvement program.

Accordingly, the main aim of this research focused on a set of concerns regarding HR initiatives focused on employees‟ commitment and quality awareness, developed in smaller firms. These concerns gave rise to the research‟s main focus and got materialized through the following purposes: (i) to study HR initiatives focused on employees‟ commitment and con-sciousness/awareness about the importance of quality improvement in firms‟ competitiveness; (ii) to compare employees‟ attitudes toward specific issues related to quality improvement, in small firms and in medium sized ones; (iii) to test if SME‟ dimension influence, somehow, initiatives developed towards employees‟ commitment and quality awareness. Considering such purposes, arguments and concerns highlighted throughout literature focusing on SME, the following hypotheses were established: 1) Hypothesis 1: Training programs focused on quality management and driven to HR assumes different preponderances in SME according to firms‟ size. 2) Hypothesis 2: HRM initiatives driven to increase employees‟ awareness, commitment and participation in quality continuous improvement projects assume different preponderances in SME

according to firms‟ size.

Data collection and analysis Based on the results of literature review, literature gaps were identified and this prompted the need for an empirical survey in SMEs in order to close these gaps. Empirical data was collected using questionnaires. The questionnaire designed was guided by the results of literature review as well as previous case studies. For research‟s purposes, a distinction was made between small firms (fewer than 50 employees) and medium-sized ones (between 50 and 250 employees). Questionnaires focusing on quality management issues and the nature of relations between SME and the main stakeholders were mailed to 600 Portuguese SME, selected using a simple random sampling method. The questionnaire was pre-tested and validated with the help of a panel of two academics/researchers on quality management issues and two quality managers in SME. Out of the sample, a total of 95 questionnaires were completed and returned; this gave a final useful survey response rate of around 16%. This was considered satisfactory since other studies analyzed during the literature review and focusing on production/operations management or quality management, were based on similar response rates. Respondents in all cases were quality managers or, in alternative, SME‟ senior managers.

Data gathered through questionnaires were submitted to a set of statistical analyses tools, using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), and punctually, some of microsoft excel‟s statistics and data bases tools. In accordance with research purposes, univariate analyses were performed on issues strictly descriptive, while bivariate analysis tools were used on issues based on means comparison (Student‟s T test and Chi-square test). Table 1 summarizes the main methodological considerations which supported the research carried out.

RESULTS Overview of employees’ main demographic characteristics Data gathered show that, in most of SME, employees‟ mean age range was "between 21 and 40 years old". Results obtained also show that in many firms, most of the employees live in the same locality as the firm they work on: in about 70% of firms, close to 60% of employees live in the same place they work on.

Concerning HR‟ formal education, data collected show that nearly 50% of employees‟ educational level is equal or below the 6th grade. According to results summarized in Table 2, in almost 10% of SME, the percentage of employees with an education level under the 6th grade does not exceed 15%. In contrast, in almost one third of SME, around 70 % of employees have an education level under the 6th grade. If on one side the lower limit (zero) predicts good perspectives for those firms, on the other hand, cases like firms with 97% of their HR with an educational level below the 6th grade may be worrying attending to the possible implications on quality continuous improvement. In fact, due to the importance recognized to training and development programs directed at all the employees in the search of quality

Mendes 6985

Table 1. Research‟s methodological considerations.

Time horizon Cross-section analysis

Geographical focus Portugal

Sector Manufacturing firms

Firms‟ size Small and medium sized (fewer than 250 employees)

Data collection Questionnaire by mail

Sample definition Sample randomly selected

Sample 600 firms

Response rate 95 Responses – 16%

Statistical analysis Univariate and bivariate analysis

Table 2. Percentage of employees with an educational level equal or below the 6th grade.

% of employees with an educational level equal or below the 6th grade Frequency % Cumulative %

[0-13] 9 9.5 9.5

[14-27] 16 16.8 26.3

[28-41] 10 10.5 36.8

[42-55] 15 15.8 52.6

[56-69] 14 14.7 67.4

[70-83] 16 16.8 84.2

[84-97] 15 15.8 100.0

Total 95 100.0

continuous improvement, the low academic formation degree may have a direct influence on quality improvement strategies, even if some researches like Collins (1995) suggested that formal education may not be a success factor for the development of high-performance teams.

HR awareness regarding quality issues

As stressed by Dale (1994), firms embracing TQM principles must make sure that every collaborator has a clear vision about what the organization expects from him and about the way his tasks fit into the overall activities. Information gathered and summarized in Table 3 shows that 8.4% of firms develop plans in order to raise collaborators‟ levels of consciousness/awareness about the importance of quality improvement measures in firms‟ competitiveness. Such observation suggest clear concerns from most of SME about quality matters, in general, and about the importance of every collaborator‟s involvement in programs oriented toward quality improvement, in particular.

Statistical analysis through Pearson Chi-square test of independence (p = 0.005) and crosstab analysis (Table 3) suggest that SME‟ propensity to develop initiatives directed at promoting quality importance decrease as

employees‟ mean age increases. In fact, results show that in SME with a lower employees‟ mean age, the percentage of firms that promote employees‟ awareness regarding the importance of quality in firms‟ competitiveness is larger. This observation can suggest that in SME with younger employees, these may accept such initiatives with greater naturalness; younger employees may be more open-minded regarding organizational changes, in general, and quality improvement needs, in particular, corroborating theories and empirical evidences highlighted in researches published throughout literature, stressing that youngest employees are usually less resistant to changes.

Accordingly, results suggest clearly that SME‟ propensity to develop awareness initiatives directed at promoting quality importance is significantly correlated with employees‟ mean age. Thus data suggest that employees‟ mean age may hinder the implementation of initiatives directed to quality improvement, and that youngest employees may accept changes more naturally, comparing with oldest ones.

Hypothesis 1: Training programs focused on quality management and driven to HR assume different preponderances in SME according to firms‟ size.

Literature review stresses the importance of training and development programs specifically focused on quality

6986 Afr. J. Bus. Manage.

Table 3. Initiatives directed at promoting quality importance versus employees‟ mean age.

Development of initiatives directed

at promoting quality importance

Age (mean) Total

< 30 years old 30 to 40 years old > 40 years old

Count 2 6 3 11

No Row % 18.2% 54.5% 27.3% 100.0%

Column % 8.7% 9.4% 37.5% 11.6%

Count 21 58 5 84

Yes Row % 25.0% 69.0% 6.0% 100.0%

Column % 91.3% 90.6% 62.5% 88.4%

Total Count 23 64 8 95

Row % 24.2% 67.4% 8.4% 100.0%

Chi-square test significance: 0.005.

Table 4. Development of training programs focused on quality improvement versus SME‟ size.

Size Development of training programs focused on quality improvement

Total No Yes

Count 10 20 30

Small firms Row % 33.3% 66.7% 100.0%

Column % 52.6% 26.3% 31.6%

Count 9 56 65

Medium-sized firms Row % 13.8% 86.2% 100.0%

Column % 47.4% 73.7% 68.4%

Total Count 19 76 95

Row % 20.0% 80.0% 100.0%


improvement, for an effective labor‟s awareness and participation in quality continuous improvement projects. Concerning training and development, information summarized in Table 4, shows that 80% of SME developed training programs focused on quality improvement specifically directed to labor, suggesting that, beyond fostering quality improvement awareness, most of SME supply their collaborators with tools necessary to their performance. In fact, as highlighted by Dale (1994), it is not enough to specify what is expected from labor; workers‟ training and development assumes a preponderant role when attempting to assure that labor‟s general vision concerning quality issues is compatible with the philosophy of continuous improvement.

Suspecting that SME‟ propensity to develop training and development programs directed to labor may be influenced somehow by firms‟ dimension, a crosstab analysis was performed. Results summarized in Table 4 suggest a significant relationship between both variables;

such evidence is reinforced statistically, attending to results of the Pearson Chi-square test of independence (significance - 0.027). In fact, considering smaller firms, data show that one third did not develop training and development programs focused on labor‟s needs, while in medium-sized firms the percentage do not surpass 14%. As a matter of fact, the information gathered suggest that medium-sized firms seem to have a higher propensity to assure training and development programs to better face difficulties raised during the quality improvement process.

Results obtained showed a close relation between both factors, suggesting differences among firms of different dimension, statistically supported. Besides, the percentage analysis showed that medium-sized firms have, in fact, a higher propensity to assure labor‟s training and development on quality issues, allowing a better way to overcome difficulties raised from quality improvement processes; thus hypothesis 1 may be confirmed.

Mendes 6987

Table 5. Training programs‟ focus.

Training programs directed to …. Frequency %

Top management Mid-management Shop floor employees

x 23 30.2

x 7 9.2

x x 12 15.8

x 2 2.6

x x 4 5.3

x x 4 5.3

x x x 24 31.6

Total (*) 76 100

(*) Number of firms that developed training programs focused on quality management).

Data summarized in Table 5 allow some insights about addressees of training and development programs undertaken by SME inquired in this research and focused in quality improvement. As highlighted by Besterfield et al. (1999), the core objective of TQM is to guarantee that everyone is conscious that he belongs to a relationship customer-supplier and that his full involvement is essential in the prosecution of quality improvement. Furthermore, higher involvement means, according to Ross (1993), more responsibility, which requires specific skills, generally reached through training and development programs. Information summarized in Table 5 show that 83% of SME provide training and development programs focused on quality improvement for shop floor employees. In fact, data also enhance that about one third of SME focus their training and development programs directed to quality improvement, exclusively to collaborators from the lower hierarchy level. Regarding top management, less than half of SME provide training and development programs focused on quality management and directed to this hierarchical level. Finally, data gathered enhanced that almost a third of SME inquired use to follow equitable training and development policies, developing plans that cover all hierarchical levels, acting thus in consonance with the basic TQM principles. Therefore, summarizing, information collected seems to suggest that training and development programs undertaken by inquired SME, and focused on quality improvement issues, are directed preferentially at lower hierarchical levels, possibly because generally such employees have lower academic qualifications.

Concerning training and development programs design, the information obtained shows that more than eighty percent of SME define their own programs and courses; in fact, only 18.9% of SME use packages developed by third parties. Such observation seems quite positive, since data gathered suggests clearly that the great majority of inquired SME, develop their own packages, defined attending to the real needs of each firm, avoiding generic training plans designed by others which may not

attend to the real nature and specificities of each SME. Furthermore, it may be enhanced that the relation between this variable and SME‟ dimension (number of employees) is not statistically significant. In fact, the crosstab analysis performed between both variables and the results of the Pearson Chi-square test of independence (significance - 0.459) did not reveal information statistically supported which may indicate that small firms and medium-sized ones may act differently regarding how training and development programs are designed.

Another positive observation deals with workforce being previously enlighten about general training and development programs‟ importance. In fact, data gathered shows that 86. 3% of SME worry about elucidating collaborators about these programs‟ importance. Such initiatives are important, since explaining previously workforce about programs‟ purposes may, somehow, contribute to motivate them, highlighting the importance both for worker's own development, and for SME‟ improvement through higher levels of efficiency and effectiveness. Furthermore, it may also be referred that the relation between this variable and SME‟ dimension (number of employees) was not statistically significant. The crosstab analysis performed and results of the Pearson Chi-square test of independence (significance - 0.566) did not reveal any sign statistically supported which may indicate that small firms and medium-sized ones may act differently regarding such initiatives.

Beyond this analysis, a further attempt was conducted to check if SME which provide training and development programs was specifically oriented to quality improvement issues and those which provide only general programs, act differently regarding collaborators‟ previous awareness concerning training and development‟ importance. The information obtained through a crosstab analysis performed and summarized in Table 6, shows that 94.7% of SME which provide training and development programs specifically focused on quality improvement issues demonstrates clear


Table 6. Development of training programs focused on quality management versus SME‟ size.

Development of training programs focused on quality management

Workforce is previously enlightened about training and development programs’ importance? Total

No Yes

Count 9 10 19

No Row % 47.4% 52.6% 100.0%

Column % 69.2% 12.2% 20.0%

Count 4 72 76

Yes Row % 5.3% 94.7% 100.0%

Column % 30.8% 87.8% 80.0%


Row % 13.7 % 86.3% 100%


concerns in providing previous explanations concerning training and development‟s importance. In opposition, regarding SME which only provide general training and development programs, only 52.6% of those ensure that collaborators are previously enlighten about programs‟ importance.

The tendency observed through table‟s analysis is supported statistically through results of the Pearson Chi-square test of independence (significance - 0.000). In fact, all the information obtained allow this study to suggest clearly that SME which provide training and development programs specifically focused on quality improvement issues, which are more sensitive to the importance of the workforce‟s previous enlightenment about programs‟ purposes and how it may contribute to workers‟ own development, and improve SME levels of efficiency and effectiveness.

Regarding training and development programs‟ appraisal, results in Table 7 show that almost one third of SME inquired do not use to develop evaluation initiatives. Results also suggest that such tendency may not be related to firms‟ size, attending to results of the Pearson Chi-square test of independence (significance - 0.575).

A further attempt was conducted to check if SME which provide training and development programs specifically focused on quality improvement issues and those which provide only general programs, act differently regarding programs‟ appraisal. The information obtained through a crosstab analysis performed and summarized in Table 8, shows that more than 80% of SME that provide training and development programs directed to quality improvement, undertake some efforts towards such initiatives‟ appraisal. On the other hand, from companies that do not provide programs directed to quality improvement (19), less than one third (6) carry out training and development programs‟ appraisal. Such tendency, observed through descriptive data, is supported through the results of the Pearson Chi-square

test of independence (significance - 0.000). All this seems to suggest that SME where collaborators are provided with training on quality improvement, are more sensitive and demonstrate clear concerns about the importance of appraisals in continuous improvement planning.

A further crosstab analysis was performed in order to check if SME which undertook efforts towards training and development programs‟ appraisal, and those which do not, acted differently, regarding attempts to previously foster collaborators‟ awareness concerning training and development‟ importance. Results are summarized in Table 9. As may be observed, only one of the 67 SMEs which perform training and development programs‟ appraisal (1.5%) is not troubled with collaborators‟ previous enlightenment concerning the importance of such programs for both firms and employees‟ development. Analyzing the table through another angle, it can also be observed that among the 82 firms which demonstrate some concerns in providing previous explanations concerning training and development programs‟ importance, 66 use to carry out such initiatives‟ appraisal. Both previous observations are supported statistically through results of the Pearson Chi-square test of independence (significance - 0.000). All this seems to suggest that SME which generally undertake efforts to complete training and development programs with a further evaluation, use to carry out previous sessions focused on explanations about training and development programs‟ importance and scope, showing a relative sensitivity to the importance of employees‟ previous enlightening about programs‟ purposes and how it may contribute to their own development, and simultaneously improve SME‟ levels of efficiency and effectiveness, demonstrating clear concerns about its importance for continuous improvement policies.

In order to clarify some issues inherent to employees‟ characteristics, a set of propositions was included in the

Mendes 6989 Table 7. Training and development programs‟ appraisal versus SME‟ size.

Size Training and development programs are duly subjected to appraisals?

Total No Yes

Count 10 20 30

Small firms Row % 33.3% 66.7% 100.0%

Column % 35.7% 29.9% 31.6%

Count 18 47 65

Medium-sized firms Row % 27.7% 72.3% 100.0%

Column % 64.3% 70.1% 68.4%


Row % 29.5% 70.5% 100.0%


Table 8. Development of quality training/development programs versus programs‟ appraisal.

Development of training and development programs focused on quality management

Training and development programs are duly subjected to appraisals? Total

No Yes

Count 13 6 19

No Row % 68.4% 31.6% 100.0%

Column % 46.4% 9.0% 20.0%

Count 15 61 76

Yes Row % 19.7% 80.3% 100.0%

Column % 53.6% 91.0% 80.0%


Row % 29.5% 70.5% 100.0%


questionnaire sent to SME, which had to be weighted attending to a scale from "Total agreement" (5) to "Total disagreement" (1), assessing how each one corresponded to an initiative currently implemented in SME. One of the purposes of this study was to check if these propositions presented significant differences according to firms‟ dimension. Thus, beside a descriptive analysis, a T test was also performed. Data analysis allowed information summarized in Table 10, which enhance for each proposition, both means and standard deviations for each one of the two groups of firms, as well as the results of the appropriate mean‟s comparison statistical test.

As may be observed, information gathered is not conclusive; however, some considerations may be approached. First of all, it should be enhanced that inquired SME disagree regarding the proposition which suggested that "employees face quality issues

negatively", showing that employees are conscious about quality‟s importance to SME‟ survival, facing such inevitability with positive attitude, especially because those SME seem to agree that "most of the best ideas about how to improve come up from employees".

Regarding documentation, SME also disagree, although less significantly, with other two propositions: “processes‟ documentation is faced by employees as waste of time" and "employees feel that processes‟ documentation may turn them dispensable". Those observations contrast somehow with some ideas spread in the literature which are focused on management research, namely those referred to in Ghobadian and Gallear (1997), and which ensure that in SME, most of the processes‟ activities are executed by a single employee, who frequently resist to document his/her know-how for two main reasons. According to Ghobadian and Gallear (1997) such documentation may be faced by


Table 9. Employees‟ previous enlightening versus programs‟ appraisal.

Workforce is previously enlightened about training and development programs’ importance

Training and development programs are duly subjected to appraisals Total

No Yes

Count 12 1 13

No Row % 92.3% 7.7% 100.0%

Column % 42.9% 1.5% 13.7%

Count 16 66 82

Yes Row % 19.5% 80.5% 100.0%

Column % 57.1% 98.5% 86.3%


Row % 29.5% 70.5% 100.0%


employees as a waste of time; furthermore employees may be afraid that processes and procedures‟ documentation could turn them dispensable.

The inquired SME also disagree about the idea that "employees face training and development programs with resistance”. What data computed seems to suggest is that “workers’ overload hinders frequently training and development programs’ implementation". Furthermore it should also be enhanced that “younger employees accept changes more easily”. Data gathered support somehow results obtained before, namely regarding the previous observation that SME‟ propensity to develop awareness initiatives directed at promoting quality importance was significantly correlated with employees‟ mean age, suggesting that age may hinder the implementation of initiatives directed to quality improvement, and that youngest employees may accept changes more naturally, comparing with oldest ones, being more open-minded about quality improvement issues and organizational changes in general. Such remarks approach some management theories which stress that youngest employees are usually less reluctant regarding changes.

A further attempt was conducted to analyze if there were significant differences between small firms‟ responses and medium-sized ones‟. Comparing both groups‟ means regarding each proposition (Table 10), it may be noticed that groups‟ means computed are not significantly different. In fact, more significant differences correspond to the following propositions: (i) workers‟ overload hinders frequently training and development programs‟ implementation (0.49), (ii) processes‟ documentation is faced by employees as waste of time (0.41) and (iii) employees face quality issues negatively (0.41). Such observation is reinforced through results obtained from the appropriate mean‟s comparison statistical test, suggesting that differences between small firms and medium-sized ones are not statistically

significant (at least for a 0.95 significance level). Even reducing the significance level to 0.9, differences are only statistically different for the three propositions already enhanced. However it may be highlighted that propositions‟ agreement levels are higher for medium-sized firms, suggesting that, human resources in small firms are more open-minded regarding changes involved in quality improvement procedures‟ implementation. Firms’ size and human resource (HR) initiatives directed at quality improvement The main literature review performed enhanced the significant importance of HRM within TQM philosophy, namely concerning how employees develop their potential to pursue firms‟ overall quality, involving areas such as HR‟ planning, employees‟ involvement, employees‟ training and development, and employee's expectations and satisfaction. Results from the research carried out by Magjuka (1994) suggested significant relationships between employees‟ involvement practices (assessed through team-work conceptions, goals setting, and access to information) and performance regarding quality improvement. Thus, as reinforced by Ahire et al. (1995), HRM is a key factor in TQM and can be responsible for significant differences in firms‟ performance (even among firms with similar technical capabilities). Hypothesis 2: HRM initiatives driven to increase employees‟ awareness, commitment and participation in quality continuous improvement projects assume different preponderances in SME according to firms‟ size. In order to test if the main initiatives directed at improving quality differed according to firms‟ dimension, a T test was applied. Table 11 highlights results obtained from

Mendes 6991 Table 10. Statements focused on HR versus SME‟ size – T tests‟ results.

Statements Firm’s size

N Mean Standard deviation Significance

Most of employees have to perform multiple different tasks

Small firms 30 3.03 1.25 0.752

Medium firms 65 2.95 1.08

Total 95 2.98 1.13

Employees face training/development programs with resistance

Small firms 30 2.43 1.17

0.155 Medium firms 65 2.77 1.01

Total 95 2.66 1.07

Employees face knowledge‟s documentation negatively


0.134 Medium firms 65 3,12 1.18

Total 95 3.00 1.18

Workers‟ overload hinders frequently training and development programs‟ implementation

Small firms 30 3.03 1.22 0.055


Total 95 3.37 1.16

Processes‟ documentation is faced by employees as waste of time


0,105 Medium firms 65 2.68 1.19

Total 95 2.55 1.15

Employees feel that processes‟ documentation may turn them dispensable


0.848 Medium firms 65 2.62 1.11

Total 95 2.60 1.14

Employees face quality issues negatively Small firms 30 1.67 0.80

0.058 Medium firms 65 2.08 1.04

Total 95 1.95 0.98

Most of the best ideas about how to improve come up from employees


0.740 Medium firms 65 3.42 1.17

Total 95 3.39 1.11

Younger employees accept changes more easily

Small firms 30 4.03 1.13 0.464


Total 95 3.91 1.15

Each statement was weighted, in a scale from "Total agreement" (5) to "Total disagreement" (1), assessing how each one corresponds to an initiative currently implemented in SME. 95 SME (*) p<= 5%.

data processing, showing averages and standard deviations for each one of the initiatives previously considered. Table 11 also shows results of the appropriate statistical test of averages‟ comparison.

Regarding HRM, Table 11 shows that, among the 14 initiatives considered, data enhance significant statistical

differences in four cases: (i) working conditions (hygiene and organization) are duly controlled, (ii) employees are surveyed about possible improvements, (iii) employees are provided with sufficient power to develop their full potential, and (iv) employees are duly surveyed about their satisfaction level. Furthermore, it can be seen that


Table 11. HRM Initiatives in quality improvement and firm‟s size - T test‟s results.

Considerations Firm’s size N Mean Std. dev.

Percentage in each level Significance

5 4 3 2 1

Working conditions (hygiene and organization) are duly controlled

Small F. 30 4.43 0.73 53.3 40.0 3.3 3.3 0.016 (*)

Medium F. 65 4.00 0.83 26.2 53.8 15.4 3.1 1.5

Total 4.14 0.82 34.7 49.5 11.6 3.2 1.1

All collaborators‟ tasks are duly set and clarified

Small F. 30 3.83 1.05 26.7 46.7 13.3 10.0 3.3 0.380

Medium F. 65 4.00 0.75 26.2 49.2 23.1 1.5

Total 3.95 0.86 26.3 48.4 20.0 4.2 1.1

Employees are surveyed about possible improvements

Small F. 30 4.20 0.71 36.7 46.7 16.7 0.036 (*)

Medium F. 65 3.77 1.00 21.5 49.2 16.9 9.2 3.1

Total 3.91 0.93 26.3 48.4 16.8 6.3 2.1

The firm encourages managers to discuss operational subjects with employees

Small F. 30 4.10 0.76 30.0 53.3 13.3 3.3 0.158

Medium F. 65 3.82 0.97 24.6 44.6 20.0 9.2 1.5

Total 3.91 0.91 26.3 47.4 17.9 7.4 1.1

Employees' training and formation needs are duly considered and analyzed

Small F. 30 3.80 1.00 23.3 50.0 10.0 16.7 0.562

Medium F. 65 3.95 1.28 46.2 27.7 9.2 9.2 7.7

Total 3.91 1.19 38.9 34.7 9.5 11.6 5.3

Employees are duly surveyed about internal conditions and improvements monitoring

Small F. 30 3.93 0.94 33.3 33.3 26.7 6.7 0.150

Medium F. 65 3.65 0.87 13.8 47.7 29.2 7.7 1.5

Total 3.74 0.90 20.0 43.2 28.4 7.4 1.1

Appropriate training and development initiatives are developed, directed at all employees

Small F. 30 3.70 1.06 23.3 40.0 23.3 10.0 3.3 0.974

Medium F. 65 3.71 1.10 24.6 41.5 18.5 10.8 4.6

Total 3.71 1.08 24.2 41.1 20.0 10.5 4.2

Employees are provided with sufficient power to develop their full potential

Small F. 30 3.93 0.91 33.3 30.0 33.3 3.3 0.043 (*)

Medium F. 65 3.52 0.90 9.2 49.2 29.2 9.2 3.1

Total 3.65 0.92 16.8 43.2 30.5 7.4 2.1

Employees‟ performance appraisal is performed with regularity

Small F. 30 3.87 1.01 26.7 46.7 16.7 6.7 3.3 0.145

Medium F. 65 3.51 1.15 23.1 29.2 27.7 15.4 4.6

Total 3.62 1.11 24.2 34.7 24.2 12.6 4.2

Employees are duly involved in the quality system‟s documentation process

Small F. 30 3.67 0.92 23.3 26.7 43.3 6.7 0.740

Medium F. 65 3.58 1.20 21.5 41.5 21.5 4.6 10.8

Total 3.61 1.11 22.1 36.8 28.4 5.3 7.4

Employees are duly surveyed about their satisfaction level

Small F. 30 4.00 1.11 40.0 36.7 10.0 10.0 3.3 0.019 (*)

Medium F. 65 3.42 1.10 16.9 33.8 27.7 16.9 4.6

Total 3.60 1.13 24.2 34.7 22.1 14.7 4.2

Employees‟ needs and expectations are duly considered in the overall planning process

Small F. 30 3.73 0.91 16.7 50.0 26.7 3.3 3.3 0.162

Medium F. 65 3.43 1.00 12.3 38.5 33.8 10.8 4.6

Total 3.53 0.98 13.7 42.1 31.6 8.4 4.2

Employees are surveyed about their main worries and expectations

Small F. 30 3.60 1.00 20.0 36.7 26.7 16.7 0.587

Medium F. 65 3.46 1.21 20.0 38.5 16.9 16.9 7.7

Total 3.51 1.15 20.0 37.9 20.0 16.8 5.3

Employees are provided with detailed information about firm‟s business

Small F. 30 3.17 0.83 10.0 10.0 70.0 6.7 3.3 0.250

Medium F. 65 2.91 1.09 4.6 26.2 38.5 16.9 13.8

Total 2.99 1.02 6.3 21.1 48.4 13.7 10.5

averages computed for small firms are higher than those computed for medium-sized ones in most of the initiatives considered, suggesting that, concerning quality improvement, HR initiatives may be generally more preponderant in smaller firms. In fact, data suggest that, in smaller organizations, it may be easier to foster an atmosphere able to benefit employees' personal growth, motivating them to submit new ideas able to improve or expand the business. Results suggested also that, in small firms, employees work daily in an atmosphere more familiar, allowing maybe some freedom to mold work conditions and act by their own initiative, when justified.

Table 11 also shows, for each variable, means for both groups, frequencies by groups (and for each one of the scale‟s levels), and results of appropriate means comparison statistical tests. The means computed range essentially from 3.5 (slightly suitable) to 4 (suitable), suggesting that HR related initiatives have a moderate relevance regarding quality continuous improvement in SME. The lower mean computed correspond to information about firm‟s business provided to employees. Considering the importance of this initiative for employees' motivation and involvement, such result can be explained by a misunderstanding of the inherent advantages of an efficient communication policy from top management. Furthermore, literature focused on smaller firms enhances the difficulty that SME face frequently to maintain specialized employees. Thus the fear of losing specialized employee to competitors or through spin-offs may inhibit SME from opening too much the business to employees. Regarding the remaining variables, data suggest that, generally, these initiatives belongs to SME‟ routine, namely concerning such issues like working conditions‟ control, delimitation and clarification of every employee‟s tasks, attention paid to employees‟ opinion about possible improvements, discussion about operational subjects with employees, training and development programs undertaken based on previous survey and analysis of formation needs, among others.

One of the main purposes of this study was to analyze if within SME, both small firms and medium-sized ones behave according similar patterns. According to results of the T test computed and highlighted in Table 11, small firms and medium-sized ones seem to behave differently in 4 cases (attending to a 0.05 significance level): (i) working conditions (hygiene and organization) are duly controlled, (2) employees are surveyed about possible improvements, (3) employees are provided with sufficient power to develop their full potential, and (4) employees are duly surveyed about their satisfaction level.

Data shows that means computed for smaller firms are higher than those computed for larger firms, not only in cases with significant statistical differences, but also in most of all the remaining cases, suggesting, therefore, that HRM has a stronger relevance in smaller firms, in what concerns to quality improvement. Thus, attending to the apparent proximity between small firms‟ top

Mendes 6993 management and employees, and in line with other studies, like Ghobadian and Gallear (1997), or Cook et al. (1998), data gathered seem to suggest that, in smaller firms, it may be easier to foster an atmosphere which could benefit employees‟ personal growth, stimulating them to submit ideas capable to contribute to quality improvement. Results also suggest that, in smaller firms, employees work under an atmosphere more familiar, allowing them a relative degree of freedom to mold their work conditions and to act on their own initiative, when necessary.

Attending to results obtained, it may be reasonable to suggest that hypothesis 2 is partially confirmed. In fact, although results only show 4 cases with significant statistical differences, smaller firms are usually associated with higher means in the remaining cases, suggesting that, in smaller firms, the eventual proximity between top management and employees assumes a great importance in the construction and consolidation of an atmosphere conducive to the full participation as well as to the personal and organizational growth, corroborating results of other researches like Ghobadian and Gallear (1997). Conclusions Summary and final considerations The main aim of this research was to analyze at what extent smaller firms are really conscious, in a first place, about the importance of raising employees‟ awareness about quality improvement issues, as key factors affecting firms‟ competitiveness and, in a second place, about the importance of fostering every employee‟s involvement in programs oriented toward quality improvement. Moreover, the research tested if training programs focused on quality management, and driven to HR, in particular, and initiatives driven to HR, directed at quality improvement, in general, assumed different preponderances in SME according to firms‟ size.

First of all, it should be enhanced that results suggest clear concerns from most SME about raising employees‟ levels of consciousness/awareness about the importance of quality improvement issues on firms‟ competitiveness, fostering every collaborator‟s involvement in programs oriented toward quality improvement, such observation is extremely positive and suggests that top management develops initiatives to guarantee that all employees are conscious that they belong to an internal dyad customer-supplier and that their full involvement is crucial for quality continuous improvement.

Findings showed that most SME developed training programs specifically focused on quality improvement, suggesting that, beyond fostering quality improvement awareness, SME supply their employees with tools necessary to develop their skills and (or acquire new

6994 Afr. J. Bus. Manage. insights needed to improve their performance. These evidences may indicate that top management is aware about the importance of training and development focused on quality improvement, for effective employees‟ participation in quality continuous improvement initiatives.

Management literature acknowledges that there are significant operational differences between SME and larger firms, and researchers concerned with organizational size noticed that what applies to larger organizations may not apply to SME. Results in this specific study suggest that, even within SME, differences in attitude towards HRM initiatives focused on quality improvement may be attributed to organizational size.

Considering researches published and specifically those focused on SME, it would be expected, or at least, reasonable to assume, that, HR initiatives driven at quality improvement may be generally more preponderant in medium-sized firms, in comparison with small firms, specially attending to the claimed lack of resources generally connoted to smaller organizations. However, findings reached from this research, show exactly the opposite. In fact, smaller firms showed a higher propensity to develop HR initiatives directed to quality improvement. Such results may suggest that, in smaller organizations, it may be, in fact, easier to foster an atmosphere able to benefit employees' personal growth, and motivate them to submit new ideas able to improve or expand the business, corroborating ideas spread throughout literature (Yusof and Aspinwall, 1999; Price and Chen, 1993), highlighting that smaller firms are commonly characterized by a lean structure based on a close relation between hierarchical levels, resulting in a higher flexibility, and an atmosphere more familiar.

Regarding training and development, specifically, data gathered suggested that medium-sized firms seem to have a higher propensity to assure employees‟ training and development programs on quality issues, to better face and overcome difficulties raised during the quality improvement process, corroborating findings from other studies which suggest that differences in attitude towards employee training may be attributed to firm‟s dimension. Such results may be explained by the so preached resources‟ scarcity in smaller firms. In fact, as stressed by several authors, smaller organizations do not have generally the necessary resources and expertise, facing strong difficulties to gain economies of scale (Reid et al., 2002; Kotey and Sheridan, 2001; Chandler and McEvoy, 2000; Klaas et al., 2000; Moreno-Luzon, 1993; McEvoy, 1984). Furthermore, according to Westhead and Storey (1996), benefits may be underestimated by smaller firm managers, partially because they are usually gained in the long-term, turning investments in such initiatives unattractive to SME, since these operate generally in a short time horizon. As a result, it seems that, effectively, smaller firms lack systematic approaches to training programs, corroborating results highlighted by Hill and Stewart (2000), or MacMahon and Murphy (1999) who

enhanced that training initiatives developed in smaller firm are usually qualified as informal, unplanned, reactive, and short-term oriented. Limitations and future research directions This study approached critical issues to quality continuous improvement in any SME; as found through an extensive literature review, such concerns may represent a field where research can extensively expand. If some of the conclusions reported in this paper, are not totally new, they confirm results of prior researches, spread over literature, while other findings reported here, may provide a number of potentially fruitful avenues for further research, even if they have to be interpreted in the light of a number of limitations. In fact, although the empirical results are largely supportive to our original purposes, the study has several limitations.

First of all, the research focused on a specific sector that is, manufacturing. Accordingly, a special attention should be paid in attempting to generalize results to other economic sectors. Furthermore, the research focused specifically on the national context of Portugal. Because the study is part of a larger project focused on Portuguese SME specifically, the survey population is limited to those firms. Our results therefore might not be generalizable to firms in other countries. As a result, in order to test the external validity of such findings, further researches, directed at the replication and expansion of this study in other countries and industries, would be welcome. Furthermore, relying upon self-reports of single informants might potentially affect somehow findings with respondent biases. A multiple-informant approach, through a set of case-studies would enhance the internal validity of findings.

Besides these clues for further researches, it seems clear that more research is needed to fully understand the importance of HR initiatives developed in smaller firms to foster employee‟s awareness and full involvement in quality improvement processes is phenomenon. For example, results reached suggest that smaller firms showed a higher propensity to develop HR initiatives directed to quality improvement, probably due to benefits gained through a lean structure, based on few hierarchical levels and a familiar atmosphere, which may turn easier promoting employees‟ awareness and their full involvement in quality improvement initiatives. Moreover, regarding training, specifically, data show that medium-sized firms may have a higher propensity to assure employees‟ training programs on quality issues, suggesting that smaller firms really lack systematic approaches to training issues.

Such evidences may suggest that if, at an early stage firms may effectively benefit from a set of advantages, which facilitate HRM focused on quality improvement, as firms grow, training initiatives may turn more structured

and formal, through a higher resources‟ availability, although, as a result, firms may lose some of the advantage gained before, like flexibility and its initial familiar atmosphere. Nevertheless, such reasoning can only be confirmed through different research projects‟ design, longitudinal in nature, which may gain additional insights from the dynamic growth process. Further researches based on longitudinal case studies and followed over time, may capture such hypothetic reasoning.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The research was supported by Programa de Financiamento Plurianual das Unidades de I&D da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Ensino Superior.

REFERENCES

Ahire SL, Golhar DY (1996). Quality Management in Large Versus

Small Firms. J. Small. Bus. Manage. 34(2): 1-13. Ahire SL, Landeros R, Golhar DY (1995). Total Quality Management: a

literature review and an agenda for future research. Prod. Oper. Manage. 4(3): 277-306.

Azzone G, Cainarca GC (1993). The Strategic Role of Quality in Small Size Firms. Small. Bus. Econ. 5(1): 67-76.

Badri MA, Donald D, Donna D (1995). A study of measuring the critical factors of quality management. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manage. 12(2): 36-53.

Baird K, Hu KJ, Reeve R (2011). The relationships between organizational culture, total quality management practices and operational performance. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Man. 31(7): 789-814.

Barrett R, Mayson S (2007). Human resource management in growing small firms. J. Small. Bus. Enterp. Dev. 14(2): 307-320.

Bayazit O (2003). Total quality management (TQM) practices in Turkish manufacturing organizations. TQM Magazine. 15(5): 345–350.

Bayazit O, Karpak B (2007). An analytical network process-based framework for successful total quality management (TQM): An assessment of Turkish manufacturing industry readiness. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 105(1): 79-96.

Besterfield DH, Besterfield-Michna C, Besterfield GH, Besterfield-Sacre M (1999). Total Quality Management. 2nd Ed., Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA.

Black S, Porter L (1996). Identification of the critical factors of TQM. Decis Sci J 27(3): 396-402.

Blanco-Callejo M, Gutierrez-Broncano S (2010). Application of the total quality management approach in a Spanish retailer: the case of Mercadona. Total. Qual. Manage. Bus. 21(12): 1365-1381.

Brah SA, Tee SL, Rao MB (2002). Relationship between TQM and performance of Singapore companies. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manage. 19(4): 356-379.

Carson DJ (1985). The evolution of Marketing in Small Firms. Eur. J. Mark. 19(5): 7-16.

Chandler GN, McEvoy GM (2000). Human resource management, TQM, and firm performance in small and medium-sized enterprises. Enterp. Theor. Pract. 25(1): 45-58.

Chiu RK (1998). Employee involvement in a total quality management programme: problem in Chinese firms in Hong Kong. Manage. Audit. J. 14(1-2): 8-11.

Conti T (1993). Building Total Quality - A guide for management. Chapman and Hall, London, UK.

Cook R, Chaganti R, Haksever C (1998). Quality Practices of very small and Small Firms: A Study of Empowerment, Teamwork and Training.

Mendes 6995

Proceedings from the 22nd National Small Business Consulting Conference, 4-7 Feb., Santa Fé, New Mexico.

Dale B, Cooper C, Wilkinson A (1997). Managing Quality and Human Resources: A Guide to Continuous Improvement, 2nd ed., Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, UK.

Delaney JT, Huselid MA (1996). The impact of human resource management practices on perceptions of organizational performance. Acad. Manage. J. 39(4): 949-969.

Deming WE (1986). Out of the crisis. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA. Dow D, Samson D, Ford S (1999). Exploding the myth: do all quality

management practices contribute to superior quality performance?. Prod. Oper. Manage. 8(1): 1-27.

Easton GS (1993). The 1993 state of US total quality management: a Baldrige examiner‟s perspective. Calif. Manage. Rev. 35(3): 32-54.

Flynn BB, Schroeder RG, Sakakibara S (1994). A Framework for Quality Management Research and an Associated Measurement Instrument. J. Oper. Manage. 11(4): 339-366.

Fuentes-Fuentes MM, Llorens-Montes FJ, Fernandez LM (2006). Total Quality Management, strategic orientation and organizational performance: the case of Spanish companies. Total. Qual. Manage. Bus. 17(3): 303-323.

Gadenne D, Sharma B (2009). An investigation of the hard and soft quality management factors of Australian SMEs and their association with firm performance. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manage. 26(9): 865-880.

Ghobadian A, Gallear D (1997). TQM and Organization size. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manage. 17(2): 121-163.

Gibb A (1997). Small firms training and competitiveness: Building upon the small business as a learning organization. Int. Small. Bus. J. 15(3): 13-29.

Gunasekaran A (1999). Enablers of total quality management implementation in manufacturing: a case study. Total. Qual. Manage. 10(7): 987-996.

Gunasekaran A, Goyal SK, Martikainen T, Yli-Olli P (1998). Total Quality Management: a New Perspective for Improving Quality and Productivity. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manage. 15(8/9): 947-968.

Gunasekaran A, Okko P, Martikainen T, Yli-Olli P (1997). Improving Productivity and Quality in Small and Medium Enterprises: Cases and Analysis. Int. Small. Bus. J. 15(1): 59-72.

Guzzo RA, Jette RD, Katzell RA (1985). The effects of psychologically based intervention programs on worker productivity: a meta-analysis. Person. Psychol. 38(2): 275-291.

Hackman RJ, Wageman R (1995). Total quality management: empirical, conceptual and practical issues. Admin. Sci. Q. 40(2): 309-342.

Hansson J, Klefsjo B (2003). A core value model for implementing total quality management in small organisations. TQM J. 15(2): 71-81.

Hill R, Stewart J (2000). Human Resource Development in Small Organisations. J. Eur. Ind. Train. 24(2/3/4): 105-117.

Hornsby JS, Kuratko DK (1990). Human resource management in small firms: critical issues for the 1990. J. Small. Bus. Manage. 28(2): 9-18.

Issac G, Chandrasekharan R, Anantharaman RN (2004). A Conceptual Framework for Total Quality Management in Software Organizations. Total. Qual. Manage. Bus. 15(3): 307-344.

Jennings P, Beaver G. (1997). The managerial dimension of small business failure. Strat Change 4(5): 1-17.

Juran JM, Gryna F (1993). Quality planning and analysis. McGraw-Hill, New York, USA.

Kanji G (1990). Total Quality Management: the second industrial revolution. Total. Qual. Manage. 1(1): 3-11.

Kasul RA, Motwani JG (1995). Total Quality Management in Manufacturing – Thematic Factor Assessment. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manage. 12(3): 57-76.

Klaas B, McClendon J, Gainey T (2000). Managing HR in the small and medium enterprise: the impact of professional employer organizations. Enterp. Theor. Pract. 25(1): 107-123.

Kochan TA, Gittell JH, Lautsch BA (1995). Total quality management and human resource systems: an international comparison. Int. J. Hum.Resour. Manage. 6(2): 201-222.

Kotey B, Folker C (2007). Employee Training in SMEs: Effect of Size and Firm Type-Family and Nonfamily. J. Small. Bus. Manage. 45(2): 214-238.

Kotey B, Sheridan A (2001). Gender and the practice of HRM in small business. Asia. Pac. J. Hum. Resour. 39(3): 23-40.

6996 Afr. J. Bus. Manage. Kotey B, Slade P (2005). Formal HRM practices in small growing firms.

J. Small. Bus. Manage. 43(1): 16-40. Lakhe RR, Mohanty RP (1994). Total quality management - Concepts,

evolution, and acceptability in developing economies. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manage. 11(9): 9-33.

Lee C (2004). Perception and Development of Total Quality Management in Small Manufacturers: An Exploratory Study in China. J. Small. Bus. Manage. 42(1): 102-115.

Lee GL, Oakes IK (1995). The „pros‟ and „cons‟ of TQM for smaller firms in manufacturing: some experiences down the supply chain. Total. Qual. Manage. 6(4): 431-444.

Loan-Clarke J, Boocock G, Smith A, Whittaker J (1999). Investment in Management Training and Development by Small Business. Employee Relat. 21(3): 296-310.

Mabey C, Thomson A (2001). Management development in the small business sector: A report at the millennium. Train Manage. Dev. Meth. 15(2): 417-425.

MacMahon J, Murphy E (1999). Managerial Effectiveness in Small Enterprises: Implications for HRD. J. Eur. Ind. Train. 23(1): 25-35.

Magjuka RJ (1994). Employee Involvement and Continuous Process Improvement (TQM): An Empirical Study. Int. J. Manage. 11(1): 620-628.

Marchington M (1995). Fairy tales and magic wands: new employment practices in perspective. Employee Relat. 17(1): 51-66.

Marlow S, Patton D (1993). Managing the Employment Relationship in the Smaller Firm: Possibilities for Human Resource Management. Int. Small. Bus. J. 11(4): 57-64.

McEvoy G (1984). Small business personnel practices. J. Small. Bus. Manage. 22(4): 1-8.

Miller WJ (1996). A Working Definition for Total Quality Management (TQM) Researchers. J. Qual. Manage. 1(2): 149-159.

Moreno-Luzon MD (1993). Training and the implementation of quality programmes by a sample of small and medium-sized firms in Spain. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manage. 10(3): 6-19.

Noci G (1996). Selecting Quality Based Programs in Small Firms. Small. Bus. Econ. 8(6): 431-447.

O‟Brien RC (1995). Employee involvement in performance improvement: a consideration of tacit knowledge, commitment and trust. Employee Relat. 17(3): 110-120.

Pace LA (1989). Motivation towards system integration. Surv. Bus. 25(1): 41-57.

Pfeffer J (1998). The human equation: Building profits by putting people first. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, USA.

Porter L, Parker A (1993). Total Quality Management - the Critical Factors. Total. Qual. Manage. 4(1): 13-22.

Powell TC (1995). Total Quality Management as Competitive advantage: A Review and Empirical Study. Strat. Manage. J. 16(1): 15-37.

Prajogo DI, Sohal AS (2006). The relationship between organization strategy, total quality management (TQM), and organization performance - the mediating role of TQM. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 168(1): 35-50.

Prasad S, Tata J (2009). Micro-enterprise quality. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manage. 26(3): 234-246.

Price MJ, Chen EE (1993). Total quality management in a small, high technology company. Calif. Manag. Rev. 35(3): 96-117.

Pun KF, Chin KS (1999). Bridging the needs and provisions of quality education and training: an empirical study in Hong Kong industries. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manage. 16(8): 792-810.

Pun KF, Chin KS, Gill R (2001). Determinants of Employee Involvement Practices in Manufacturing Enterprises. Total. Qual. Manage. 12(1): 95-109.

Pun KF, Jaggernath-Furlonge S (2012). Impacts of company size and culture on quality management practices in manufacturing organisations: An empirical study. The TQM J. 24(1): 83-101.

Rahman S (2001). A comparative study of TQM practice and organisational performance of SMEs with and without ISO 9000 certification. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manage. 18(1): 35-49.

Ramirez C, Loney T (1993). Baldrige Award Winners Identity the Essential Activities of a Successful Quality Process. Qual. Digest. 3: 28-40.

Reid RS, Harris RID (2002). The determinants of training in SME in

Northern Ireland. Educ + Train 44(8): 443-450. Roberts I, Sawbridge D, Bamber G (1992). Employee relations in small

firms. in Towers, B (Eds). A Handbook of Industrial Relations Practice. 3rd ed, Kogan Page, London, UK.

Roca-Puig V, Escrig-Tena AB, Bou-llusar JC, Beltran-Martin I (2006). A systemic and contingent view of the basic elements of quality management. Total. Qual. Manage. Bus. Excel. 17(9): 1111–1127.

Ross JE (1993). Total Quality Management – Text, Cases and Readings. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, Florida, USA.

Saraph JV, Benson PG, Schroeder RG (1989). An Instrument for Measuring the Critical Factors of Quality Management. Decis. Sci. J. 20(4): 810-829.

Seetharaman A, Sreenivasan J, Boon LP. (2006). Critical Success Factors of Total Quality Management. Qual. Quant. 40(5): 675-695.

Shearer C (1996). TQM requires the harnessing of fear. Qual. Progr. 29(4): 97-101.

Smith AJ, Boocock G, Loan-Clarke J, Whittaker J (2002). IIP and SMEs; Awareness, benefits and barriers. Pers. Rev. 31(1/2): 62-86.

Sohal AS, Samson D, Ramsay L (1998). Requirements for successful implementation of total quality management. Int. J. Tech. Manage. 16(4-6): 505-519.

Soltani E, Lai P-C, Phillips P (2008). A new look at factors influencing total quality management failure: work process control or workforce control?. New Tech Work Employ 23(1-2): 125-142.

Storey D (1994). Understanding the small business sector. Routledge, London, UK.

Storey D (2004). Exploring the link among small firms, between training and firm performance: a comparison between UK and other OECD countries. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manage. 15(1): 112-130.

Sun H, Hui I, Tam A, Frick J (2000). Employee involvement and quality management. TQM Magazine. 12(5): 350-354.

Talib F, Rahman Z, Azam M (2011). Best Practices of Total Quality Management Implementation in Health Care Settings. Health. Mark. Q. 28(3): 232-252.

Tamimi N (1998). A Second-Order Factor Analysis of Critical TQM Factors. Int. J. Qual. Sci. 3(1): 71-79.

Tamimi N, Gershon M (1995). A Tool for Assessing Industry TQM Practice Versus the Deming Philosophy. Prod. Inventory. Manage. J. 36(1): 27-32.

Tamimi N, Sebastianelli R (1998). The barriers to total quality management. Qual. Progr. 31(6): 57-60.

Van der Wiele A, Dale BG, Williams A (1997). ISO 9000 Series Registration to Total Quality Management: The Transformation Journey. Int. J. Qua.l Sci. 2(4): 236-252.

Watson JG, Korukonda AR (1995). The TQM Jungle: a Dialectical Analysis. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manage. 12(9): 100-109.

Welikala D, Sohal A (2008). Total Quality Management and employees' involvement: a case study of an Australian organization. Total. Qual. Manage. 19(6): 627-642.

Westhead P, Storey D (1996). Management Training and Small Firm Performance: Why the Link is Weak. Int. Small. Bus. J. 14(4): 13-25.

Wilkes N, Dale BG (1998). Attitudes to Self-Assessment and Quality Awards: A Study in Small and Medium-sized companies. Total. Qual. Manage. 9(8): 731-739.

Wilkinson A (1995). Re-examining quality management. Review of Employment Topics 3(1): 187-211.

Wilkinson A (1998). Empowerment: theory and practice. Pers. Rev. 27(1): 40-56.

Yusof SM, Aspinwall E (1999). Critical success factors for total quality management implementation in small and medium enterprises. Total. Qual. Manage. 10(4/5): S803-S810.

Zairi M (1996). What's in the basket? A survey on integrated management through BPR and TQM. TQM Magazine 8(6): 58-65.

Zairi M (2005). TQM Sustainability: How to maintain its gains through Transformational change. Proceedings of the ASQ World Conference on Quality and Improvement, Seattle, WA. 59(0): 175-188.

Documents

Employees’ involvement and quality improvement in ...employees’ awareness, and fostering employees’ full involvement in quality programs. Moreover, the research tested if general