4.2 Article

Exploring the influence of quality management systems in work engagement and psychological empowerment in private institutions of social solidarity

Journal

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT & BUSINESS EXCELLENCE
Volume 33, Issue 3-4, Pages 243-277

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/14783363.2020.1832460

Keywords

psychological empowerment; work engagement; private institutions of social solidarity; social services; ISO 9001; quality standards

Categories

Funding

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia [UIDB/04007/2020]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that employees with a leadership role in IPSSs with an ISO 9001-based QMS have a significantly greater perception of empowerment compared to those in IPSSs without a QMS; although these differences are not statistically significant, they are still noteworthy.
Aiming at exploring the influence of quality management systems (QMS) in staff's work engagement and psychological empowerment in private institutions of social solidarity (IPSSs), this study performs a comparative analysis between institutions with and without an ISO 9001-based QMS. Data were collected through questionnaires applied to employees from two IPSSs with a certified QMS and two IPSSs without a QMS. Findings show that although employees' perception about psychological empowerment and engagement are generally higher in IPSS with an ISO 9001-based QMS, these differences are not statistically significant. Nevertheless, in what empowerment concerns, the perception of employees with leading role in IPSS with an ISO 9001-based QMS is significantly greater than the perception of those in IPSS without a QMS. To our knowledge, no previous study has investigated the influence of ISO 9001-based QMS in employees' work-related attitudes in the third sector; these results contribute thus to new insights concerning a clearly under-researched field.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available