Integration of standardized management systems: does the implementation order matter?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze whether the order or the strategy of management system standards (MSSs) implementation in an organization determines the level of integration of its standardized MSSs. Design/methodology/approach Groups of organizations that follow different implementation sequences have been obtained descriptively using a sample of 435 Spanish organizations, registered to two MSSs (ISO 9001 and ISO 14001) at the minimum. Differences with respect to the size of the organizations are also studied. Findings The results obtained show six different groups of organizations that follow different sequences of implementation and that have different levels of integration of their MSSs. Among the more interesting findings, organizations that had implemented quality and environmental MSSs simultaneously and have 50 employees or less achieve higher levels of integration compared to other organizations in the sample. Originality/value The paper analyses those sequences of management systems implementation that allow organizations to achieve higher levels of integration and presents a possible pattern for the companies initiating the integration process.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it