You are on page 1of 16

Verslo ir teiss aktualijos / Current Issues of Business and Law

ISSN 1822-9530 print / ISSN 2029-574X online

2011, 6(1), 5368

doi:10.5200/1822-9530.2011.03

Contribution of integrated environment, safety, security


and quality management to business excellence
Pekka Tervonen1, Harri Haapasalo2, Jukka Pkkil3
MSc, LPhil, eMBA, DSc, R&D Manager
Rautaruuukki Corporation
P.O. Box 93, FI-92101 Raahe, Finland
E-mail: pekka.tervonen@ruukki.com; tel.: +358 40 557 8911

 Eng, MEcon, DSc, Professor & Vice Dean


M
Department of Industrial Engineering and Management
University of Oulu
FI-90014 University of Oulu, P.O. Box 4610, Oulu, Finland,
E-mail: harri.haapasalo@oulu.fi; tel.: +356 40 518 2275

MEng, Investment respondent


Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment
P.O. Box 86, FI-90101 Oulu, Finland
E-mail: jukka.pakkila@ely-keskus.fi; tel.: +358 40 195 1051

Received 3 February 2011, accepted 11 April 2011

Abstract

Although the systems approach in management can be considered as a wider entity, it is


usually considered to consist of quality, environmental and safety systems as an integrated
management system. This study discusses the impacts of integrated Environment, Safety &
Security, Quality Management systems and quality award models, especially the European
Foundation of Quality Management model as regards the business and success of companies.
At the moment, there is no widely accepted standard equivalent to ISO standards for integrated Environment, Safety & Security, Quality Management systems. This study shows that integrated management systems and quality award models are beneficial to the operations and
competitiveness of organisations. However, their use must be considered on a case-by-case
basis and the models must be tailored to meet the needs of a specific organisation. In general,
i
ntegration is considered as a positive and beneficial phenomenon. The elimination of overlapping operations, joint development of different sectors and better use of resources will save
costs and, at their best, can improve the companys operating culture. The experimental part
of the study indicates that international steel companies do not use integrated Environment,
Safety & Security, Quality Management systems and quality award models very actively. In
any case, according to the results of this study, companies consider the objective of the aforementioned models a good way to gain and maintain competitive advantage.
http://www.vta.ttvam.eu

53

P. Tervonen, H. Haapasalo, J. Pkkil


Contribution of integrated environment, safety, security and quality management ...

Keywords: environment, safety, security and quality management, integrated management system, quality award models.

Integruotos aplinkos apsaugos, saugos, saugumo ir

kokybs vadybos sistem poveikis verslo tobulumui


Anotacija

Nors vadyboje sisteminis metodas gali bti taikomas gana plaiai, paprastai laikoma, kad jis
apima kokybs, aplinkos apsaugos ir darb saugos sistemas, kurios kartu sudaro integruot
vadybos sistem. i studija nagrinja integruot aplinkos apsaugos, saugos ir saugumo, kokybs vadybos sistem ir kokybs apdovanojim modeli, ypa Europos kokybs vadybos
fondo sukurto modelio, poveik bendrovi verslui ir skmingai veiklos pltrai. iuo metu
nra integruotoms aplinkos apsaugos, saugos ir saugumo, kokybs vadybos sistemoms parengto ir plaiai pripastamo standarto, kuris bt prilygintas ISO standartams. is tyrimas
parodo, kad integruotos vadybos sistemos ir kokybs apdovanojim modeliai yra naudingi
organizacij veiklai ir konkurencingumui. Vis dlto j naudojimas turi bti vertinamas kiekvienu atskiru atveju, o modeliai turi bti pritaikyti taip, kad atitikt konkreios organizacijos poreikius. Apskritai integracija laikoma teigiamu ir naudingu reikiniu. Besidubliuojani proces atsisakymas, bendra skirting sektori pltra ir geresnis itekli panaudojimas
leis sumainti katus ir net tobulinti bendrovs veiklos kultr. Eksperimentin tyrimo dalis
leidia daryti ivad, kad tarptautins plieno gamybos bendrovs aktyviai nenaudoja integruot aplinkosaugos, saugos ir saugumo, kokybs vadybos sistem ir kokybs apdovanojim modeli. Bet kuriuo atveju, remiantis io tyrimo rezultatais bendrovs vertina mint
modeli gyvendinim, kaip ger galimyb gyti ir ilaikyti konkurencin pranaum.
Reikminiai odiai: aplinka, sauga, saugumas ir kokybs valdymas, integruota vadybos
sistema, kokybs apdovanojim modeliai.

Introduction
The development of management systems and integration of environmental,
quality and safety issues in the same system have become an important factor
in a companys competitiveness. It is no longer sufficient for an organisation
to focus only on internal issues; instead, management systems must take into
account the surrounding environment, clients and the increasing number of
other interest groups. Excellent business management, for example, through
quality management models, is needed in successful organisations.
The objective of this study is to examine the impact of an integrated management system and excellent business management on the competitiveness
and success of an organisation. The research objective was also to examine the

54

Verslo ir teiss aktualijos / Current Issues of Business and Law, 2011, 6(1), 5368

impact of the successful implementation of the two tools on each other. The
research questions used to operationalise these goals are:
1. What are the experiences in applying Environment, Safety & Security,
Quality (ESSQ) management as an integrated management system in
organisations?
2. What kind of benefits and challenges do integrated ESSQ management
systems provide in respect of organisational success?
3. Are international steel companies integrating their ESSQ management systems and what is the maturity of ESSQ management in these companies?
The first two questions have been discussed in the literature review to exa
mine the foundations of integrated management systems and quality award mo
dels. The second and third question has been studied based on empirial analysis
of the case company and a proportion survey of international steel companies.
The study follows the principles that Yin (2003) presented for case studies.
The empirical material for the case companys ESSQ maturity level eva
luations has been collected through qualitative interviews (13 interviews for
environmental management; 12 for safety management; 10 for quality mana
gement) in order to describe the history and the current situation in the target company. The people interviewed varied from senior management to line
management and ESSQ managers. The questions were qualitative in nature
and mainly based on the literature. In addition to the interviews, the case companys management systems documentation from the companys archives was
used (Ruukki, 2008). The levels were then utilised in benchmarking the case
company with the steel companies of the World Steel Association (Fig. 1).
Original
theoretical
framework

Interviews, documents
and analysis of Ruukki
ESSQ state of the art

Literature review of
integrated
management systems
and quality award
models

ESSQ
integration and
maturity
survey on steel
companies

RQ 1

Maturity
analysis and
comparison of
international
ESSQ levels

RQ 2

Synthesis
and
managerial
implications

RQ 3

Fig. 1. Description of the research process


(source: authors description)

55

P. Tervonen, H. Haapasalo, J. Pkkil


Contribution of integrated environment, safety, security and quality management ...

The survey of international steel companies was conducted in the form of a


written questionnaire (Metsmuuronen, 2006; Jrvinen & Jrvinen, 2000; Yin
2003). The questions used were based on literature view and the weaknesses
and development points of three analyses of the case companys ESSQ management. In addition, the questionnaire was based on earlier studies of the case
company, and on the ESSQ level of Finnish companies. The series of questions used in the interviews of the ESSQ study was adjusted for this study. The
questionnaire was divided into six parts. The first part (Part A) examines the
background of ESSQ management in the target organisation, e.g. the content
of management systems, certifications, the level of integration and the use of
quality award models. The subsequent four parts (B-E) focus on the maturity
levels of different sections in accordance with the Toddlergrade model. The
last part (F) gives the target organisation an opportunity to evaluate its own
ESSQ management and its different sectors using the Toddlergrade model and
its instructions.
Questionnaires were sent to a total of about 30 member companies of the
World Steel Association. The companies were geographically located around
the world, some of the companies were local and some global. 7 replies were received, which gives the response rate of 23%. The organisations which provided
replies form a solid basis in the field of the steel industry. They include several
leading steel producers and leading pioneers in a number of ESSQ sectors.
The Toddlergrade model was chosen as the maturity model of the research
by reason of its four important properties: it is simple, transparent, it can be
applied to companies of different sizes operating in different fields of industry, and it allows rapid assessment of a company. The Toddlergrade maturity
model is designed by the case company for the development of an organisations ESSQ management that organisations can utilise for assessing and developing the ESSQ actions of their processes or the entire organisation. The
Toddlergrade model utilises the PDCA cycle (Plan-Do-Check-Act) developed
by Deming in 1986. The phases of the Toddlergrade model are: Leadership,
Steering systems, Follow-up systems and Innovativeness. The model is also
based on categories founded on the EFQM (European Foundation for Quality
Management) model.
The Toddlergrade model describes the maturity levels of the entire ESSQ
management framework and its different sectors using a four-stage scale (rollover, crawl, walk and run). An organisation at the roll-over level is discovering
ESSQ issues and is starting to consider the possible linking of the E, SS and Q
sectors. At the crawling level, an organisations ESSQ specialists are aware of
56

Verslo ir teiss aktualijos / Current Issues of Business and Law, 2011, 6(1), 5368

the benefits gained by combining the E, SS and Q sectors and are also trying
to convince top management of the matter. At the walk level, an organisations
level is higher than the average ESSQ management in general, and the specia
lists are doing more than what is required. At the run level, an organisation
is at the forefront of global ESSQ management and paves the way for other
organisations. The Toddlergrade model examines an organisations maturity
level always with respect to risks and the business environment.
1. Experiences of applying the ESSQ as an integrated
management system
Separate areas, also management systems (ESSQ) experienced evolution in
the past. Traditional environmental management was directed by legislation
created in close connection with major environmental hazards or threats. Ho
wever, modern environmental management aims to be proactive rather than
reactive: it emphasises the prevention of problems and the use of environmental management as a positive way to communicate with society (Tervonen etal., 2010a; Elhag etal., 2008). The development of safety management
also follows the development of legislation and regulations. Organisational
development was passive, since it is dictated from the outside of the organisation by regulators and the government. Only in recent years development
has resulted in a more active approach of organisations own volition and own
origins (Tervonen etal., 2009b). The measurement of safety culture is categorised under the proactive approach of safety performance (Afrazeh & Bartsch,
2007; Choudhry etal., 2007). The development of quality management is often
described in the literature as a four-stage process: inspection, quality control,
quality assurance and total quality management, where quality is seen in an
all-inclusive and strategic manner. Responsibility for quality is, at this point,
extended to cover all members of an organisation. The role played by corporate
management also becomes central (Tervonen etal., 2008).
At the moment, there is no widely accepted standard equivalent to ISO
standards for integrated ESSQ management systems. For example, Kazilinas
(2010) believes that there is a strong relationship between the companies ISO
9000 certification benefits and a firms financial performance. Continuous improvement factors are also very important during the post-certification period.
Different integration levels in organisations set a challenge for the making of
a universal standard (Jrgensen et al., 2006). Typically, the most commonly
57

P. Tervonen, H. Haapasalo, J. Pkkil


Contribution of integrated environment, safety, security and quality management ...

integrated management systems are quality, environmental and occupational


health and safety standards. They are typically based on widely used standards,
such as ISO 9001, ISO 14001 and OHSAS 18001, that include common cha
racteristics and starting points, which makes them relatively easy to integrate
(Zeng etal., 2007; Jrgensen etal., 2006; Wilkinson & Dale, 1999).
The integration of operating systems is always challenging, because the best
integration method depends on the characteristics of the organisation in question and there is no single universal model. Successful integration is dependent
on several factors, such as the content of existing systems, the field of operation,
organisational culture and a number of other factors (Wilkinson & Dale, 1999;
Karapetrovic & Jonker, 2003). According to Wilkinson and Dale (1999), the
ISO9000 and ISO14001 standards and their derivates can be used as a starting
point for integration, similar to a number of other combinations of different
standards, integrated core standards and the related, more loosely connected
subsystems or tools or the use of the EFQM model as the all-inclusive integration tool for all operations. For example, Six Sigma aligns and integrates statistical tools for quality excellence in a manner that is at odds with a number of
long-held quality improvement concepts (Goh, 2010; Tervonen etal., 2010b).
The system model presented by Karapetrovic and Jonker (2003) is an incorporating model that combines operation-focused quality, environmental,
client and financial administration systems into one management system.
Their model shows different systems and their main interest groups: for example, clients for the quality management system, society for the environmental
management system, and owners for the financial administration system. The
model is based on the idea that systems affecting different things should be
and can be first joined together and then integrated into a holistic management system. For example, Wilkinson and Dale (2001) have studied quality
systems as goal-oriented systems in which the models available for the creation
of an environment and safety can be combined (Karapetrovic & Jonker, 2003;
Tervonen etal., 2010b).
According to Wilkinson and Dale (2000, 2001), an integrated management
system points out that they do not take into account organisational culture
and so-called soft values. Their integrated management system model is based
on the existing and accepted quality (QMS), environmental (EMS), and safety
(OHSMS) management systems. The model also considers cultural aspects.
In the model, the integrated quality, environmental and safety management
systems have lost their independence and their role is to serve the entity in an
integrated way, benefiting the entire organisation. In this way, it is possible to
58

Verslo ir teiss aktualijos / Current Issues of Business and Law, 2011, 6(1), 5368

achieve a strong culture, which is divided between quality, environmental and


safety issues, where core values and procedures of the entire organisation are
based on holistic quality management (Wilkinson & Dale, 2001).
Zeng etal. (2007) have developed a simple three-level model for the integration of management systems. Their model starts by combining the ISO9001
quality, the ISO14001 environmental and OHSAS18001 occupational health
and safety standards, which all divide, among others, Demings PDCA cycle.
The levels included in the model are strategic synergy; organisational/resour
ces, structural and cultural synergy; and documentation synergy. Responsibilities must be made clearer at all levels of an organisation and combined under
the same roof. The corporate management have to commit to, and participate
in, integration, because it will support the formation of an organisational culture (Zeng etal., 2007).
The models of excellent business management, such as the Malcolm Bal
dridge National Quality Award model (MBNQA) and the European Quality
Award model (EFQM), are also a possible tool for the integration and development of management systems. Their advantages include the incorporated actions-results link. Result-generating sections, which control all operations from
the viewpoint of an organisation, can be incorporated as a part of an integrated
management system. These sections facilitate the integration of separate mana
gement systems into one entity (Karapetrovic & Jonker, 2003; Conti, 2006).
According to Wilkinson and Dale (1999), the benefits of the EFQM model
in the implementation of an integrated management model ensure development and continuous improvement. Integration can be based either on stan
dards or the foundation of holistic quality management reached through the
quality award model. Standards and their exploitation create a basis, i.e. quality assurance and control, whereas the EFQM and other quality award models
add the viewpoint of optimisation and business.
Bou-Llusar etal. (2009) have studied the impacts of a number of quality
awards and the EFQM model in particular on an organisations performance
and link to the TQM core values. An extensive literature survey points out an
explicit connection between EFQM assessment areas and TQM core values.
The same themes are repeated in several studies, although categorised in a
slightly different way, but with convergent contents. For example, Juran (1999)
states that the most important advantage of quality award models is the increased communication between quality specialists and management. The results of benchmarking are thus communicated to the corporate management,
and this makes them aware of the companys situation and how other companies achieve their results.
59

P. Tervonen, H. Haapasalo, J. Pkkil


Contribution of integrated environment, safety, security and quality management ...

2. Benefits and challenges of integrated


ESSQ management
According to Adler and Shper (2010), an ideal organisation comprises huma
nistic management, joy of work, open information flow, enhanced freedom
for employees. Therefore, business is forced to mine for knowledge based on
humanistic management, constantly thinking about quality and not forgetting
about time and cost. It must be systematic in creating innovations. The most
important advantage of integration is the decrease in overlapping systems.
Decreased documentation, registration, bureaucracy and paperwork will save
time and resources, because the aforementioned tasks are optimised and both
internal and external audits will become simpler. Moreover, goals and responsibilities for different integrated areas are defined in one location on the basis of
one management system (Jrgensen etal., 2006; Zeng etal., 2007). According
to Zutshi and Sohal (2005), the benefits include, among others, saving costs
as the number of overlapping operations decrease, more efficient allocation of
resources at the level of the organisation, improved communication of information and harmonised training of the personnel. In addition, the companys
understanding of the requirements of its interest groups increases, as does the
clients trust in the organisation, and the corporate image improves (Tervonen
etal., 2010b).
One of the risks in combining systems of different levels is to create priority
for the systems. Organisations may have long traditions in applying a quality
management system, which means that it is usually the most advanced. When
it is combined with more recent and less mature systems, the latter may end up
having somewhat lower importance. On the other hand, if quality is at a high
level at the time of integration, the development of other systems may require
time and resources, and therefore lead to decreased interest in the development of quality, which will eventually lead to its decline. Attitudes, both those
of the corporate management and of employees, also pose a challenge to the
development of an integrated management system. Everyone must participate
in integration work, in addition to which changes in routines and traditional
operating methods must be successfully controlled (Jrgensen et al., 2006)
There must also be adequate resources for the development and maintenance
of the system in order to ensure successful integration. At the level of organisational culture, it is also challenging to move from competition between departments to co-operation in order to support the common system (Zutshi &
Sohal, 2005) (see also Tervonen etal., 2010b).
60

Verslo ir teiss aktualijos / Current Issues of Business and Law, 2011, 6(1), 5368

EFQM (2003) clearly states the improvements in financial performance of


the quality award winners who have successfully implemented EFQM compared to the control group. An example is Singhal and Hendricks study that
covered almost 600 quality award winners and the companies financial results
during the period commencing one year before winning the quality award for
the first time and ending four years after winning the competition. Saizarbitorias (2006) study, based on the Delphi method, shows that the EFQM model
decreases the number of faults and makes the supply chain more efficient,
which reduces costs. Relations with interest groups improve, as does the employees motivation and commitment to the company. The specialist panel did
not agree on all aspects of the results, but a clear majority stated that the implementation of the EFQM model was beneficial for a company. According
to Conti (1997), one of the most important benefits of quality award models
is the fact that self-assessment extends to cover a wide range of companies;
they are not intended exclusively for developing leading companies or quality
award winners (see also Tervonen etal., 2010b).
An organisations ability to learn and evolve is crucial in the modern, constantly changing business environment. The advantages of quality award mo
dels in the management of intangible assets are mainly based on the strategic
planning and forecasting included in the models. Moreover, the exploitation of
information and fact-based management contained in the EFQM model will
promote innovation and expertise. Thus, the organisation learns and processes
evolve. The EFQM sections affecting employees will have an impact on ensu
ring the development of intangible assets, such as knowledge and skill resources related to resource management (Ehrlich, 2006). As a result, Martn-Castilla
and Rodrguez-Ruiz (2008) consider that the EFQM model can also be used as
a model for intangible asset management (see also Tervonen etal., 2010b). For
example, Mikulis and Rueviius (2009) studies show the focus of Lithuanian
companies on the shorter-term and more tangible aspects of management.
However, excellent management models, such as the EFQM model, are not
unreservedly supported. Williams etal. (2006) note that the model is unable to
decrease the number of customer claims, improve the quality of products, and
sometimes even the quality award winners are unable to remedy the problems
occurring in their operations. Self-assessment has become a liability and, if
it keeps repeating, it will not bring any further added value. Corporate management does not use the model for improving the companys performance;
instead, it is used for assessing units and their leaders. According to Williams
etal. (2006), the ranking used in quality award models is one of their major
61

P. Tervonen, H. Haapasalo, J. Pkkil


Contribution of integrated environment, safety, security and quality management ...

problems. The ranking principles have remained the same, even though the
business environment has changed and, indeed, is changing. The ranking principles are also the same for different fields of industry and both the public and
private sectors. In addition, the impact of ranking or the cause-effect relationship on the actual added value of an organisation is, in some cases, somewhat
unclear or there is not sufficient research in the field (Conti, 2006) (see also
Tervonen etal., 2010b).
Erikssons (2004) study indicated that the biggest problem for companies
participating in competitions was that the competition itself took too much
attention away from development and continuous improvement. All too often
organisations focus on the winning of a competition and the actual work and
exploitation of the results may, therefore, become secondary (see also Dale
etal., 2000). Rusjan (2005) also highlights the lack of diagnostics in the quality
award systems, which was also noted by Conti (2006). These models work well
when looking for the problem points of performance, but they do not dig any
deeper. Reasons for problems cannot be analysed or the assessment or prioritisation of development points cannot be carried out using the quality award
model. However, further development can be operationalised with other tools
or in other ways (see also Tervonen etal., 2010b).
Dale etal. (2000) note that the EFQM and other TQM-related models are
often criticised for having a constantly-changing and too difficult terminology
which cannot be fully understood without specialist information. In reality,
the basic principles of, for example, ISO 9000 do not differ from the core values
of quality award models; only the terminology has changed. The difference
and the problem lies in the concepts and images created by the terminology.
The concept of excellence, for example, is not understood as the most recent
trend in quality management. Instead, it is considered equal to the standard
language word excellent and related to a number of excellent properties of a
product, e.g. inexpensive price, which makes the product excellent from the
viewpoint of the customer. Quality management has become complicated, and
quality specialists find it difficult to communicate their view to corporate management, not to mention the general public (see also Tervonen etal., 2010b).
3. Integrated ESSQ management systems
in international steel companies
A total of seven companies have replied to the questionnaire. The organisations answering the questionnaire were requested to assess their own maturity
62

Verslo ir teiss aktualijos / Current Issues of Business and Law, 2011, 6(1), 5368

level both in different ESSQ sectors and the integrated ESSQ entity using the
Toddlergrade model (Tervonen etal., 2009b). In addition, maturity levels were
evaluated on the basis of the companies replies in order to obtain a specialist
view from the outside. The maturity levels assessed by the companies themselves were not analysed or viewed prior to carrying out an analysis based on
their replies, hence self-assessments did not affect the results. Maturity levels
were assessed both for the different areas of the Toddlergrade model and as
a whole. The maturity levels of separate ESSQ sectors, e.g., the environment,
safety and quality management, were also assessed.
The companies turnover amounted mainly to billions of euros and the
number of personnel varied from several thousands to tens of thousands, which
means that the companies were of the same size as the case company very
large. The replies indicated that, in general, steel companies made relatively
little use of integrated ESSQ management systems to support their operations.
Four out of seven organisations stated that their management systems were
separate, at least from the viewpoint of ESSQ management. On the other hand,
some of these companies had integrated some sectors, e.g., environmental and
safety management systems, at least to some extent. Most companies seem to
be willing to have an integrated ESSQ system, but the implementation of such
is not yet fully accomplished. As stated in the theoretical section of this study,
changes must take place at all levels of the entire organisation. It cannot remain
a mere nominal change in the organisation and integration of operations (see
also Tervonen etal., 2010b).
None of the companies stated that they were using quality award models, at
least they had not participated in a quality award competition. Some companies stated they had won smaller awards concerning different fields of ESSQ,
mainly related to the environment, occupational health and safety. Excellencebased awards rating the operations of the entire organisation, such as the
EFQM or MBNQA, were not mentioned, nor was participation in any of them.
However, companies may have based their operating systems on quality award
models that have been tailored to meet the companys needs. The theoretical
section of this study showed that such awards were also useful for companies.
Nevertheless, companies or units that replied to the questionnaire did not systematically use quality award models (see also Tervonen etal., 2010b).
Figure 2 shows a diagram of the average values calculated on the basis of
the maturity levels of benchmarked international steel companies. The maturity levels are compared against the maturity level of the case company (Ruukki
Production). The average values of the companies self-assessments are indi63

P. Tervonen, H. Haapasalo, J. Pkkil


Contribution of integrated environment, safety, security and quality management ...

cated in orange, the evaluations made on the basis of their replies in blue and
the values of the case company in red. The diagram axes are different sectors
of the Toddlergrade model: leadership, business process management, business tracking system and innovativeness. The maturity of the Toddlergrade
sectors increases when moving away from the centre of the axes. The innermost grey diamond indicates the roll over level and the outermost refers to
the run level. The area formed by assessments thus indicates the total maturity
of an organisation: the greater the area covered, the closer the company is to
the run level.
The diagrams clearly show that companies have assessed their maturity le
vels to be on average significantly higher than those of the case company. Their
evaluations are from one to two maturity levels higher in every ESSQ sector.
The companies have typically assessed their maturity level in all sectors close
to the walk level and in some sectors, such as SS leadership and management
systems, even higher, close to the exemplary world-class level. The difference
is clearly smaller when comparing the maturity evaluations made on the basis
of the replies (blue line) with the case companys values.
E -Environmental

SS Safety and Security

Leadership

Leadership

Steering System

Innovativeness

Follow-Up System

Innovativeness

Evaluations made by
organizations
Evaluations based on
answers
Ruukki Production

Steering System

Follow-Up System

Q Quality

ESSQ maturity as a whole

Leadership

Leadership

Steering System

Innovativeness

Follow-Up System

Steering System

Innovativeness

Evaluations made by
organizations
Evaluations based on
answers
Ruukki Production

Follow-Up System

Fig. 2. Comparison of average maturity estimates


(source: authors contribution)

64

Evaluations made by
organizations
Evaluations based on
answers
Ruukki Production

Evaluations made by
organizations
Evaluations based on
answers
Ruukki Production

Verslo ir teiss aktualijos / Current Issues of Business and Law, 2011, 6(1), 5368

Self-assessments made by the companies are on average one maturity level


higher than those based only on their replies to the questionnaire. Their evaluations of leadership in occupational health and safety, in particular, show that
five respondents out of seven grade themselves on the run level, which is defined as the global forerunner that sets an example to other organisations. The
respondents either are the leading companies in the field or they have given
themselves too high a grade, e.g. they lack objectivity in their self-assessment,
which is typical of individual assessments, at least at the beginning.
Conclusions
Our study points out that the steel industry is not very active in using integrated ESSQ management systems to support its operations. Thorough integration penetrating the entire organisation has not been achieved even in the
companies that state they use integrated management systems. According to
the results of our study, quality award models are not used in the target companies, although the companies consider excellent business management, which
is, similarly to ESSQ management, the objective of the aforementioned mo
dels a good way to gain and maintain competitive advantage. This, however,
was not implemented in their actions on the practical level.
Although there is no absolute evidence of the benefits of management systems and the efficiency of EFQM, integrated management systems and quality
award models turned out to be a beneficial and reformatory way to operate
on the general theoretical level not restricted to ESSQ or the steel industry.
In general, earlier studies on integrated management systems point out clear
operational and financial advantages of integration. Integration was also criticised in previous studies and a number of potential problems and challenges
were found in the integration of different systems of an organisation.
Our study focused on the companies operating in the steel industry; thus,
widening the scope will increase reliability. Based on our findings, other companies do not utilise an ESSQ management system, at least not as extensively
as does the case company, benchmarking research sould be extended to cover
the companies that successfully utilise ESSQ in other fields of business. Their
best practices should then be applied to the case company and taken as a possibility for further development. The benefits of using quality award models
could also provide interesting findings when studied more extensively. According to our literature review in this study, using quality award models is
65

P. Tervonen, H. Haapasalo, J. Pkkil


Contribution of integrated environment, safety, security and quality management ...

beneficial for companies. Is the steel industry an exception or have the companies not yet discovered the application of the models? The correlation between
success in quality award competition and the use of integrated management
systems could also be a fruitful topic for future studies, since it has not been
widely studied.
We processed companies anonymously in order to increase reliability of
the study in every step of the research. Our aim was to make the questionnaire clear and questions short and pithy in order to improve the reliability of
replies. Internal validity was enhanced by combining theoretical and empirical parts as closely as possible. Therefore, the modified theoretical framework
combined with the detailed findings formed a natural continuum to the conclusions of this study. The reality of the cause-effect relationship was constantly
considered in analysing the collected data.
References
Afrazeh, A.; Bartsch, H. (2007). Human reliability and flight safety. International Journal of Reliability, Quality and Safety Engineering, 14(5), 501-516. doi:10.1142/S0218539307002763
Adler, Y.; Shper, V. (2010). Business and quality: In search of excellence. Current Issues of Business and Law, 5(2), 285-294. doi:10.5200/1822-9530.2010.12
Bou-Llusar, J.C.; Escrig-Tena, A.B.; Roca-Puig, V.; Beltrn-Martn, I. (2009). An empirical assessment of the EFQM Excellence Model: Evaluation as a TQM framework relative to the
MBNQA Model. Journal of Operations Management, 27(1), 122.
doi:10.1016/j.jom.2008.04.001
Choudhry, R.M.; Fang, D.; Mohamed, S. (2007). The nature of safety culture: A survey of the
state-of-the-art. Safety Science, 45(10), 9931012. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2006.09.003
Conti, T. (1997). Optimizing self-assessment. Total Quality Management, 8(2-3), 515.
Conti, T. (2006). Quality thinking and systems thinking. The TQM Magazine, 18(3), 297308.
doi:10.1108/09544780610660013
Dale, B.G.; Zairi, M.; Van der Wiele, A.; Williams, A.R. (2000). Quality is dead in Europe long
live excellence true or false? Measuring Business Excellence, 4(3), 410.
doi:10.1108/13683040010377737
Deming, W.E. (1986). Out of the Crisis. Cambridge: MIT Center for Advanced Engineering.
EFQM. (2003). EFQM Excellence Model. Brussels: EFQM Publications.
Ehrlich, C. (2006). The EFQM-model and work motivation. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 17(2), 131140. doi:10.1080/14783360500450400
Elhag, H.; Glass, J.; Gibb, A.G.F.; Clarke, M.; Budge, C.; Bailey, G.K. (2008). Implementing environmental improvements in a manufacturing context: a structured approach for the pre66

Verslo ir teiss aktualijos / Current Issues of Business and Law, 2011, 6(1), 5368

cast concrete industry. International Journal of Environmental Technology and Management,


8(4), 369384. doi:10.1504/IJETM.2008.017508
Eriksson, H. (2004). Organisational value of participating in a quality award process. The TQM
Magazine, 16(2), 7892. doi:10.1108/09544780410522973
Goh, T.N. (2010). Paradigm shifts in modern approach to quality excellence. Current Issues of
Business and Law, 5(2), 320327. doi:10.5200/1822-9530.2010.14
Jrvinen, P.; Jrvinen, A. (2000). Tutkimustyn metodeista [Methods of Research Work]. Tampere: Opinpajan kirja. (In Finnish)
Jrgensen, T.H.; Remmen, A.; Mellado, M.D. (2006). Integrated management systems three
levels of integration. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(8), 713722.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.04.005
Juran, J.M. (1999). Total Quality Management. New York: McGraw-Hill Inc.
Kazilinas, A. (2010). Impacts of different factors on the implementation of quality management systems and performance outcomes. Current Issues of Business and Law, 5, 7592.
doi:10.2478/v10088-010-0006-9
Karapetrovic, S.; Jonker, J. (2003). Integration of standardized management systems: Searching
for a recipe and ingredients. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 14(4), 451459.
doi:10.1080/1478336032000047264PMCid:2860396
Martn-Castilla, J.I.; Rodrquez-Ruiz, . (2008). EFQM Model: Knowledge governance and
competitive advantage. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 9(1), 133156.
doi:10.1108/14691930810845858
Mikulis, J.; Rueviius, J. (2009). Management systems and competitiveness of a country Lithuanian context. Current Issues of Business and Law, 3, 2646.
Metsmuuronen, J. (2006). Laadullisen tutkimuksen ksikirja [Qualitative Research Handbook].
Jyvskyl: Gummerus Kirjapaino Oy. (In Finnish)
Rusjan, B. (2005). Usefulness of the EFQM Excellence Model: Theoretical explanation of some
conceptual and methodological issues. Total Quality & Business Excellence, 16(3), 363380.
doi:10.1080/14783360500053972PMCid:2860396
Ruukki, R.P. (2008). Rautaruukin www-sivut. Retrieved September 16, 2008, from http://www.
rautaruukki.com
Saizarbitoria, I.H. (2006). How quality management models influence company results conclusions of an empirical study based on the Delphi method. Total Quality Management &
Business Excellence, 17(6), 775794. doi:10.1080/09593960600597768
Tervonen, P.; Alapiha, J.; Haapasalo, H. (2009a). Benchmarking ESSQ management system
through tailored maturity model. International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, 7(3), 262280. doi:10.1504/IJMED.2009.026079
Tervonen, P.; Haapasalo, H.; Juntunen, S. (2010a). Development of environmental management:
A case study of steel production. International Journal of Sustainable Economy, 2(2), 144163.
doi:10.1504/IJSE.2010.030756

67

P. Tervonen, H. Haapasalo, J. Pkkil


Contribution of integrated environment, safety, security and quality management ...

Tervonen, P.; Haapasalo, H.; Niemel, M. (2009b).


Evolution of safety management and systems in a steel production organization. The Open Management Journal, 2(11), 1727.
doi:10.2174/1874948800902010017
Tervonen, P.; Haapasalo, H.; Pkkil, J. (2010b). The integration of ESSQ management and qua
lity award models in leading international steel companies. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 8(1), 5877.
Tervonen, P.; Pahkala, N.; Haapasalo, H. (2008). Critical incidents in the development of quality
management in steel manufacturer production. International Journal of Business Excellence,
1(), 106120.
Wilkinson, G.; Dale, B.G. (1999). Models of management system standards: A review of
the integration issues. International Journal of Management Reviews, 1(3), 279298.
doi:10.1111/1468-2370.00016
Wilkinson, G.; Dale, B.G. (2000). Management systems: The key integration issues. In Proceedings of the Institute of Mechanical Engineering (pp. 771780), 214(B).
Wilkinson, G.; Dale, B.G. (2001). Integrated management systems: A model based on a total quality approach. Managing Service Quality, 11(5), 318-330. doi:10.1108/09604520110404040
Williams, R.; Bertsch, B.; Van der Wiele, A.; Van Iwaarden, J.; Dale, B. (2006). Self-assessment
against business excellence models: A critique and perspective. Total Quality Management
& Business Excellence, 17(10), 12871300. doi:10.1080/14783360600753737
Yin, R.K. (2003). Case study research. Design and methods (3rd ed.). London: Sage Publications, Inc.
Zeng, S.X.; Shi, J.J.; Lou, G.X. (2007). A synergetic model for implementing an integrated management system: An empirical study in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15(18), 17601767.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.03.007
Zutshi, A.; Sohal, A.S. (2005). Integrated

management system: The experiences of three Australian organisations. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 16(2), 211232.
doi:10.1108/17410380510576840

Information about the authors


Pekka Tervonen
is a R&D manager at the Rautaruukki Corporation; currently he is in charge of business excellence
development for the Rautaruukki Corporation.
Harri Haapasalo
is a professor at the Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, and vice dean in
Faculty of Technology, University of Oulu. He has research interests in management, product development, and technology management.
Jukka Pkkil
is an investment respondent; currently he is in charge of investments in transport and environment
at the Centre for Economic Development in Oulu.

68

You might also like