1. INTRODUCTION

The implementation of quality management systems may help to improve the results of organizations. Nevertheless, not all firms have derived benefits from the implementation of a quality system (Martínez-Costa et. al., 2009; Lo et al., 2011). In fact, the practice of many organizations proves that, when they implement a quality management system (for instance, ISO 9001) they do it without great commitment, as they are only interested in being awarded the certificate regardless of whether they meet its requirements (Rodríguez-Arnaldo and Martínez-Lorente, 2014). As a result, these firms apply the requirements of the quality standard in a superficial way, and therefore, do not profit from all its benefits.

In order to explain this situation, different authors have studied the internalization process of quality standards (Briscoe et al., 2005; Naveh and Marcus, 2005; Nair and Prajogo, 2009; Boiral, 2011). Internalization is the process whereby an organization applies the requirements of a quality standard in its day-to-day routine and integrates such requirements in its daily practices in order to continuously improve its activities. In this way, on the one hand, a firm may show a greater commitment to the quality philosophy, and therefore develop the quality standard requirements in a more advanced way. Alternatively, another firm may show a lower interest in the standard and implement the requirements in a more token way. In this latter case, the firm might only be interested in obtaining a certificate allowing it to prove to its customers that it does have a quality system, but not concern itself with what lies behind the certificate, i.e. the requirements of the quality standard.

This line of research, focused on the internalization of quality standard, is important for business practice, and more studies are needed helping managers to understand the benefits of internalization. The aim of this paper is to analyse the effects of the internalization of the “Q” tourist quality standard by the Spanish Institute for Tourism Quality (ICTE) upon results. For this purpose, an initial qualitative analysis has been made (interviews), followed by a quantitative analysis (regression analysis).

The context for this research is the tourist industry, where quality is a key factor for success. This sector has a great weight in Spanish economy; its share of Spanish GDP was 10.9% in 2012, with about 2.1 million persons employed in Spain (INE, 2013). At an international level, in 2015 Spain was the second most important country in international tourism income, after the United States, and the third one in international tourist arrivals after France and the United States (WTO, 2015). This paper contributes towards a better understanding of the success of quality certificates in the Spanish tourist industry.

The following section identifies the benefits of the internalization of a quality standard concerning results. Then, the methodology used is explained, with the results obtained. Finally, the conclusions are presented, together with a few recommendations for tourist firms and institutions.

2. BENEFITS OF INTERNALIZATION

Tourist organizations obtaining quality certificates can improve customer and employee satisfaction and improve their organizational outcomes (Callan, 1992; Nield and Kozak, 1999; Alvarez García et al., 2013; Sánchez-Ollero et al., 2014). However, the experience of many managers and the results of various studies on the effects of quality certification indicate that some certified organizations have improved outcomes, while others do not. This situation also occurs in the tourist industry (Breiter and Bloomquist, 1998; Nield and Kozak, 1999). In this respect, the internalization of the quality standard requirements (Naveh and Marcus, 2005; Nair and Prajogo, 2009; Allur et al., 2014; Ataseven et al., 2014) may help to explain how a quality standard may generate benefits for organizations, including tourist firms.

According to some studies, the greater the internalization level of a quality standard, the greater the benefits for organizations (Briscole et al., 2005; Naveh and Marcus, 2005; Jang and Lin, 2008). This is due to the fact that internalization entails a more advanced implementation of the quality standard requirements. For instance, one of the requirements is that of measurement, analysis and improvement. A correct, daily implementation of this requirement implies that organizations will identify indicators which really serve to evaluate their products/services and their processes (and not simply to pass an audit), and that information will be used to make decisions aimed at improvement. When this is done, the firm is really profiting from the quality standard requirements and, therefore, it is much feasible to obtain benefits.

In this way, internalization may make it more likely for firms to derive benefits. These issues have not been analysed in the tourist industry, and it may be interesting to try to analyse them for this sector. On this basis, the following research question is proposed:

Does the internalization of the quality certificate generate positive effects upon an organization’s results?

3. METHODOLOGY

In order to answer this question, we analysed the internalization level in quality-certified tourist organizations by means of a qualitative and quantitative study. In the case of Spain, in addition to the more widely known ISO 9001 standard, there is another quality management system which only applies to the tourist industry, and which also allows organizations to obtain a certificate, based on the ICTE’s “Q” tourist quality mark. This tourist quality certificate is compatible with and similar to the ISO 9001 standard, but with specific characteristics from the tourist industry.

In the qualitative study, nine in-depth semi-structured interviews were held between November 2014 and July 2014 (with two managers of two tourist associations, a consultant specializing in quality issues, three hotel managers, a beach manager, a restaurant manager and a tourist information office manager). The interviews took place at the respondents’ workplaces, with an average duration of one and a half hours each. Each interview was made by two of the joint authors of this paper. The interviews were recorded with the respondents’ consent and were transcribed. The information was supplemented with data from webpages, documents and direct observation. The transcripts of the interviews were checked by the respondents in order to ensure accuracy. The quotations which appear below are from the transcriptions. Respondents were asked about the internalization level of the quality requirements in their organizations, the effects of internalization on outcomes and the factors that contribute towards the internalization of quality for better outcomes. Together with the theory, this analysis also made it possible to specify the internalization measures in the quantitative questionnaire.

As regards the quantitative study (October 2014 to January 2015), a structured questionnaire with closed questions was sent in three waves, both by e-mail and by ordinary mail, to the 909 organizations certified through the ICTE’s “Q” tourist quality mark in the following sectors: hotels and tourist apartments, travel agencies, restaurants, rural accommodation (tourist firms), beaches and tourist information offices (tourist institutions). These two sub-sectors were selected because they were the ones with the highest percentage of tourist quality certificates according to the ICTE’s database by September 2014. 398 filled-in questionnaires were received. Table 1 shows the absolute and relative frequencies of each subsector, both in the sample and in the population studied. In order to measure internalization and outcomes, the constructs and items in Tables 2 and 3 were used. These constructs are those used in order to perform the subsequent quantitative analysis, consisting of a descriptive analysis followed by a regression analysis.

Table 1.
Absolute and relative frequencies of each subsector in the sample and in the population

*** p ≤0.001; ** 0.001 ≤ p < 0.01; * 0.01 ≤ p < 0.05; + 0.05 ≤ p < 0.10

• The number of firms in this section is higher in the ICTE website. This difference is due to the fact that a single travel agency has around 200 branches, but only one questionnaire was sent.

• The number of firms in this section is higher in the ICTE website. This difference is due to the fact that a single restaurant firm has around 400 restaurants, but only one questionnaire was sent.

Table 2.
Internalization measures (quantitative questionnaire)

Each item was measured by means of a 7-point opinion scale, and it was verified that the validity and reliability requirements were met in the measurement scales. Content validity was ensured through an extensive literature review and the opinions of tourist experts. Construct validity was assessed by means of a factor analysis for each measure. All the items forming the internalization and outcomes constructs converge into one single factor. As for criterion validity, it was verified through the correlation between the environmental result and the internalization and result variables measured in this study. The environmental result was measured through 7 items obtained from Wagner (2009). The correlation matrix showed that all the variables measured in this study are significantly related (p=0.000) to the environmental result, which shows evidence of criterion validity. Finally, reliability was measured through Cronbach’s alpha. The minimum advisable value of 0.7 is exceeded in all factors.

Table 3.
Measurements of outcomes (quantitative result)

Table 3 (continuación)

4. EFFECTS OF INTERNALIZATION ON RESULTS

In order to analyse if internalization has positive effects upon outcomes, firstly a qualitative analysis has been carried out, followed by a quantitative one. The qualitative analysis allows us to contextualize the theory within the specific case of the Spanish tourism industry. According to the respondents’ opinions, internalization may entail benefits for customers because it improves their satisfaction and it measures and analyses customer information:

“Many measurements are made in order to improve customer satisfaction, and we detect issues for correction thanks to the procedures provided by Q”

“Although it is difficult to measure the effects because the customer is not likely to pay attention […], a satisfied customer brings in more customers, whereas a dissatisfied one makes you lose them. You obtain satisfaction, repeat customers, positive opinions, etc.”

Although only some customers value the fact that the organization possesses a certificate, and many do not pay attention or do not even realize about it, a good quality system really provides the tolos to collect information from customers and improve their satisfaction. Similarly, internalization may be beneficial to employees because, amongst other issues, they know better how to do their tasks and can become more involved in improvement activities:

“The assessment is a positive one. Now they have clear ideas about how to do things and are even more motivated. It does them proud to work in a hotel with Q”

Nevertheless, according to respondents the connection is not as clear as when we discussed social benefits. Their answers show, on the one hand, that as the standard includes environmental requirements, there will be a certain organizational commitment to environmental protection. On the other hand, although there are no ethical or social requirements, the fact that the organization possesses a good quality system may lead it to go further and apply social actions, as some respondents point out. In other words, the fact that the organization possesses a good quality system may lead it to control and improve its work, and that continuous improvement process might include more advanced quality practices (for instance, social benefits for employees and reduced waste in environmental areas) which would improve social benefits.

Finally, internalization also has general benefits for the organization. Although some respondent states that in principle it may be difficult to assess, it seems that there is some repercussion:

“It is difficult to assess, but we understand that it does have some repercussion upon sales and occupancy”.

“Clearly it does have effects upon service quality, image and cost reduction, because, for instance, it improves satisfaction regarding cleaning, meals, etc.”

“There has been an improvement in service quality, in our image, etc. It is a differentiation factor. As for cost reduction, there are reductions in costs, for instance, in energy. Thanks to day-to-day work, we have two hotels ranked among the 10 best ones in our region in TripAdvisor, and the rest are usually quite well ranked. This is indeed influential for customers to buy (which is in part a result of having the Q certificate)”

In this way, a real commitment to meeting the quality requirements, i.e. an internalization of the quality requirements, will have positive effects in all areas of the organization. When the quality philosophy is part of daily work, improvements can be made little by little and such improvements will progressively generate positive outcomes for the organization. As one respondent pointed out:

“As we have been working on quality for many years, we can see the benefits of continuous improvement (for instance, the employees keep a record of incidents in order to improve). It influences all the aspects of the organization (social aspects, sales, investments, etc.). It influences everything.”

These responses indicate that the internalization of the tourist quality “Q” mark has benefits for customers, employees and society, and also for the organization, as the quantitative analysis shows. In this respect, a description is shown first of the internalization and results variables. These data indicate that the hotels, in the tourism industry firms, and the tourist information offices, in the institutions group, are the subsectors with a higher degree of implementation of the tourist quality standards requirements (see figure 1 ). In turn, differences can be observed with travel agencies and rural accommodations, with a lower level than the other subsectors. Also, it may be observed that, in general, continuous improvement is less developed than daily practices.

Figure 1.
Internalization level

Note: (1) = Total average daily practices; (2) = Total average continuous improvement

Similarly, it may be seen that the implementation of the quality standard requirements has benefits for customers and society and, although to a lesser extent, also for employees and the organization ( figure 2 ).

Figure 2.
Benefits of internalization

Note: The question on “business result” was optional for the public sector

TIO: tourist information offices

Secondly, the regression model confirms these results. In the quantitative analysis, a regression analysis is performed with the responses from the 398 tourist firms to the quantitative questionnaire. Specifically, the regressions have been made for the whole sample, with no differences between tourist firms and institutions, and subsequently the same analysis is made separately for tourist firms and for tourist institutions (see table 4 ).

Table 4.
Regression models

Table 4 (continuación)


*** p ≤0.001; ** 0.001 ≤ p < 0.01; * 0.01 ≤ p < 0.05; + 0.05 ≤ p < 0.10

Regression Model 1 contains all the tourist organizations in the 117 sample. In this case, the daily practices significantly explain employee and society benefits, whereas the continuous improvement practices significantly influence all result variables (customers, employees, society and organization). Model 1 only includes tourist firms and Model 3 only includes tourist institutions. In the case of tourist institutions, since they are not aimed at making a profit, it was decided to point out in the questionnaire that the question regarding the effects on organizational results was a voluntary one, and only some respondents provided an answer (this is why it has been decided not to include this result in table 4). The results of Models 2 and 3 show that in tourist firms daily practices have no clear benefits on customers, but they do have benefits on employees and society. For their part, these practices are not influential in the case of tourist institutions. Regarding continuous improvement, table 4 shows that it influences all the result dimensions, both for firms (Model 2) and for institutions (Model 3). In this way, within internalization, continuous improvement becomes the essential element in order to influence the results of tourist organizations. Continuous improvement is a more advanced internalization stage than that represented by daily practices and, therefore, it indicates that, the more advanced the internalization of quality requirements, the greater the benefits for customers, employees, society and the organization.

In order to achieve this internalization and improve the outcomes of tourist organizations, it is important to consider the following aspects: the quality culture, managerial and employee commitment, communication, training and internal follow-up.

All respondents commented on the important role of the management in achieving an internalization of the quality certificate requirements and improving results. This is proved, for instance, when the management takes part in defining the documentation, receives training, communicates the process to the employees and performs a follow-up:

“Managers/intermediate managers have been those who implemented the programmes, standards and procedures and prepared the training for the areas they are responsible for”

Together with this, employee commitment is also important, because they are the ones who apply the requirements of the standard every day:

“Employees apply the documentation to their daily work […] If there is a checklist in floors, restaurants, etc., people fill them in […] The documentation is in the workplace and the employees use the documents”

Communication and continuous training (managers’ and employees’ knowledge) and internal follow-up (mainly by means of indicators, through meetings or doubt-solving) are necessary components of continuous improvement in tourist organizations:

“First, you have to explain very well what is going to be done, and why. It is usually the advisor that gives the talks, together with the manager. There is an initial 20-minute talk. Then, questions are addressed, and later there is another reinforcement talk. After these, during day-to-day practice, doubts are solved as they come up, usually with the department head, the manager and the advisor, if needed.”

“Follow-up is necessary for improvement. There are two monthly meetings, and then daily contact and control by the person responsible for daily records. A lot of time is spent in improvement meetings”

All these ideas imply that team involvement (coordination among departments, team work, etc.), communication and training and internal follow-up, create a culture facilitating continuous improvement, that is, a higher level of internalization allowing for better results.

5. CONCLUSIONS

These results answer the research question (“Does the internalization of the quality certificate generate positive effects in organizational results?”), showing that tourist organizations with a quality certificate that internalize the requirements of these standards may improve their results. This proves that internalization is a basic issue when a quality system is implemented and certified. A higher commitment towards the implementation of the quality standard requirements may lead tourist organizations to improve their management system, and therefore, their results. This means that these firms believe in the quality philosophy and apply it in their activities in order to achieve real improvement.

In this respect, in order to increase the level of internalization of the certificate requirement and increase the success of quality, it is important to develop the following issues:

• Managerial commitment (for instance, through training, communication with employee, carrying follow-up, etc.).

• Employee commitment (for instance, through training, filling up records during daily practice, etc.).

• Continuous training and communication (leading to increased knowledge among both managers and employees).

• Internal follow-up (mainly through indicators).

Thus, when the quality standard requirements are applied to daily activities, it is possible to progress towards continuous improvement, which will generate benefits for tourist organizations. As the quantitative analysis shows, continuous improvement is the most important dimension of internalization, although it is less developed than daily practices. In this process, therefore, it is necessary to apply continuous improvement activities to a greater extent. These results support previous contributions and the opinions by managers, who point out that quality certificates are useful for tourist organizations if they are correctly adopted, that is, if the requirements are internalized. On the basis of these conclusions, a number of recommendations are suggested for tourist associations. Firstly, the ICTE and other tourist associations should:

• Emphasize, during their training sessions or in their meeting with tourist organizations, the importance of correctly implementing the quality standard requirements in order to better profit from their benefits.

• Focus part of their training activities on explaining the key factors to reinforce the success of a quality standard.

• Make it easier for organizations with a higher level of internalization of the quality standard requirements to share their experiences with other organizations (through benchmarking activities, ICTE meetings, etc.).

Secondly, managers of tourist firms and institutions should consider the following:

• Certification may have positive effects on results. Managers should be aware that, the greater the development of the quality standard requirements, the greater the likelihood of increased benefits. This means that a greater commitment to what lies “behind” the quality certificate will lead to improved results, because a firm may, for instance, improve its planning, control and quality improvement processes. This will result in customer, employee and society satisfaction, which in turn can improve sales, image and positive opinions/scores in social networks.

• The firm’s quality culture makes all this easier. How? Managerial commitment is a must, since it facilitates employee commitment, which is obtained through communication and training. Such communication and training must take place at the initial stages (when the system is implemented) and then continue regarding quality and/or the specific post, in order to increase employee know-how.

• Internal follow-up is essential in order to control compliance with the standards defined and improve organizational activities, and to maintain such continuous improvement culture. This internal follow-up may also serve to show the employees that the standard is being applied.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allur, E., Heras-Saizarbitoria, I. and Casadesús, M. (2014). Internalization of ISO 9001: a longitudinal survey, Industrial Management & Data Systems, 114 (6), 872-885.

Álvarez García, J., Vila Alonso, M., Fraiz Brea, J.A. and de la Cruz del Río Rama, M. (2013). Análisis de las relaciones de dependencia entre los factores críticos de la calidad and los resultados. Sector alojamiento turístico en España, Investigaciones Europeas de Dirección and Economía de la Empresa, 19, 74-89.

Ataseven, C., Prajogo, D.I. and Nair, A. (2014). ISO 9000 internalization and organizational commitment-implications for process improvement and operational performance, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 61 (1), 5-17.

Boiral, O. (2011). Managing with ISO Systems: Lessons from Practice, Long Range Planning, 14 (3), 197-220.

Bou-Llusar, J.C., Escrig-Tena, A.B., Roca-Puig, V. and Beltrán-Martín, 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, 1-22.

Breiter, D. and Bloomquist, P. (1998). TQM in American hotels. Cornell and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 39, 26-33

Briscoe, J.A., Fawcett, S.E. and Todd, R.H. (2005). The implementation and impact of ISO 9000 among small manufacturing enterprises, Journal of Small Business Management, 43 (3), 309-330.

Callan, R.J. (1992). Quality control at Avant Hotels: the debut of BS 5750, The Service Industries Journal, 12, 17-33.

Christmann, P. and Taylor, G. (2006). Firm self-regulation through international certificable standards: determinants of symbolic versus substantive implementation, Journal of International Business Studies, 37 (6), 863–878.

Curkovic, S., Melnyk, S., Calantone, R. and Handfield, R. (2000). Validating the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award framework through structural equation modeling, International Journal of Production Research, 38, 765-791.

Deng, Yeh and Sung (2013). A customer satisfaction index model for international tourist hotels: Integrating consumption emotions into the American Customer Satisfaction Index, International Journal of Hospitality Management, 35, 133-140.

INE (Instituto Nacional de Estadística) (2013). Cuenta satélite del turismo de España. Base 2008. Serie contable 2008-2012. http://www.ine.es/prensa/np829.pdf (acceso el 16 de enero de 2015).

Jang, W-Y. and Lin, C-I. (2008). An integrated framework for ISO 9000 motivation, depth of ISO implementation and firm performance. The case of Taiwan, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 19 (2), 194-216.

Kim, S.S., Lee, J. and Prideaux, B. (2014). Effect of celebrity endorsement on tourists’ perception of corporate image, corporate credibility and corporate loyalty, International Journal of Hospitality Management, 37, 131-145.

Lo, C.K.Y., Yeung, A.C.L., and Cheng, T.C.E. (2011). Meta-standards, financial performance and senior executive compensation in China: an institutional perspective. International Journal of Production Economics, 129, 119-126.

Martínez-Costa, M., Choi, T.Y., Martínez, J.A., and Martínez-Lorente, A.R. (2009). ISO 9000/1994, ISO 9001/2000 and TQM: the performance debate revisited. Journal of Operations Management, 27, 495-511.

Nair, A. and Prajogo, D. (2009). Internalisation of ISO 9000 standards: the antecedent role of functionalist and institutionalist drivers and performance implications, International Journal of Production Research, 47 (16), 4545-4568.

Naveh, E. and Marcus, A. (2005). Achieving competitive advantage through implementing a replicable management standard: installing and using ISO 9000, Journal of Operations Management, 24 (1), 1-26.

Nield, K. and Kozak, M. (1999). Quality certification in the hospitality industry: analyzing the benefits of ISO 9000, Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 40, 40-5.

Rodríguez-Arnaldo, O. and Martínez-Lorente, A.R (2014). Influencia de la corrupción en la implantación de la ISO 9001. Universia Business Review, 42, 52-67.

Sánchez-Ollero, J.L.; García-Pozo, A. and Marchante-Mera, A. (2014). Análisis de la incidenciade las certificaciones de calidad sobre la productividad de los hoteles de Andalucía, Universia Business Review, 44, 88-103.

Tarí, J.J., Molina, J.F. and Castejón, J.L. (2007). The relationship between quality management practices and their effects on quality outcomes, European Journal of Operational Research, 183 (2), 483-501.

Wagner, M. (2009). Innovation and competitive advantages from the integration of strategic aspects with social and environmental management in European firms. Business Strategy and the Environment, 18, 291-306.

WTO (World Tourist Organization) (2015). Panorama OMT del Turismo Internacional. Edición 2015. www.e-unwto.org/doi/pdf/10.8111/9789284416875 (acceso el 2 de septiembre de 2015).

Yeh, C.M. (2013). Tourism involvement, work engagement and job satisfaction among frontline hotel employees, Annals of Tourism Research, 42, 214-239.

Notes

Author notes