MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046094034 · doi:10.1108/ijqrm-12-2019-0386

Integrated management systems as a driver of sustainability performance: exploring evidence from multiple-case studies

2020· article· en· W3046094034 on OpenAlexaff
Jeniffer de Nadae, Marly Monteiro de Carvalho, Darli Rodrigues Vieira

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Quality & Reliability Management · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Management Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityOriginalityBusinessPortfolioTriple bottom lineProcess managementKnowledge managementCorporate sustainabilityCorporate social responsibilitySocial sustainabilityComputer sciencePublic relationsQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the impact of integrated management systems (IMSs) on sustainability (based on the triple bottom line (TBL) concept). To accomplish this objective, this paper seeks to answer the following research questions: How can IMS impact organizational sustainability performance? And, how the key challenges of IMS can influence companies in practice? Design/methodology/approach A case-based approach is used based on the following four cases from different sectors: an electric power distributor; an environmental consulting firm; a public transport firm; and a firm with a broad portfolio of equipment, products and provisions for industrial services in different markets. Findings The results show that the integration of management systems was driven by the companies' strategies toward sustainability. The stakeholders' perception is that a firm's image as a sustainable company also enhances environmental and social performance. The economic performance was not emphasized. Companies noted that the main challenge was motivating and engaging human resources. Originality/value This paper shows that sustainability was not a motivation for implementing an IMS. But, implementing an IMS was a driver of sustainability performance. Also, the relationship between IMS and organizational performance can be presented based on TBL perspectives, and implementing an IMS can be challenging in practice.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.142
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Quality & Reliability ManagementSame topicQuality and Management SystemsFrench-language works237,207