Articulo 76

ARCHIVES OF TRANSPORT ISSN (print): 0866-9546
Volume 68, Issue 4, 2023 e-ISSN (online): 2300-8830

DOI: 10.61089/aot2023.vf1jsa33
EXPECTATIONS OF MANUFACTURING COMPANIES

FOR SUPPLIERS REGARDING THE IMPROVEMENT
OF THEIR PROCESSES
Maciej URBANIAK1, Dominik ZIMON2, Peter MADZIK3

1
Department of Logistics, Faculty of Management, University of Lódź, Łódź, Poland
2
Department of Management Systems and Logistics, Rzeszow University of Technology, Rzeszów, Poland
3
Department of Management, Comenius University Bratislava, Bratislava, Slovakia
Abstract:
The article presents the results of conducted empirical research in which an attempt was made to identify the expec-
tations of manufacturing companies towards suppliers in terms of process (logistics customer service, supervision
over property customer, production monitoring, supplier supervision) improvement. The research was conducted us-
ing the Computer Assisted Telephone Interview (CATI) technique. The research covered 150 production medium and
large size companies (employing over 50 people) who were suppliers for enterprises from the automotive, electrome-
chanical and chemical sectors operating in the Polish industrial market. The expectations of production companies
towards their suppliers regarding improvement of processes concept were assigned a rank on a scale from one (the
least important criterion) to five (the most significant). The analysis of the results of the conducted research shows
that the implementation of management tools such as international organizational standards (ISO), Kaizen or Lean
Management by companies that are purchasers may affect the expectations towards suppliers in terms of improving
their processes. The considerations undertaken in this article confirm that in order to compete on the modern
market, close cooperation and cooperation within the supply chain are needed. Representatives of the surveyed
manufacturing companies notice this fact and set high expectations for their suppliers in virtually all the surveyed
aspects. Conducted research shows that suppliers must pay special attention to the implementation of processes
related to ensuring and improving the technical quality of products by focusing on improving control and
supervision processes and logistical aspects of customer service. Proper implementation and improvement of these
processes requires a methodical approach. Based on the obtained research results, managers of organizations
supplying manufacturing companies can obtain important information that will be used to improve processes that
are important from the point of view of their recipients. On this basis, they can make an optimal allocation of
resources and modify the management style to improve cooperation with manufacturing companies.
Keywords: manufacturing companies, supplier relationship, management systems, improvement processes
To cite this article:

Urbaniak, M., Zimon, D., Madzik, P., (2023). Expectations of manufacturing
companies for suppliers regarding the improvement of their processes. Archives of
Transport, 68(4), 157-174. DOI: https://doi.org/10.61089/aot2023.vf1jsa33.
Contact:
1) [email protected] [https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4127-1192] – corresponding author; 2) [email protected]
[https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3097-5445]; 3) [email protected] [https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1655-6500]
Article is available in open access and licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
2 Urbaniak, M., Zimon, D., Madzik, P.,
Archives of Transport, 68(4), 157-174, 2023
1. Introduction
terms of quality, timeliness, quantity, order se-
It can be commonly noticed that many enterprises,
quence) are of particular importance. A vital feature
when establishing relationships with new suppliers,
is also the assessment of the communication be-
focus their requirements on the guidelines
tween partners (effectiveness and the response time
contained in international quality, environmental
to inquiries, orders, complaints, technical or organi-
and safety management standards. The
zational problems). Increasingly important as a cri-
implementation of these guidelines allows suppliers
terion for assessing suppliers is innovation and joint
to effectively en- sure the quality of products, as
cooperation on solutions for new and modified
well as standardize and improve their processes. It
products (Wang et al. 2021).
can also be seen that the manufacturing companies
The expectations of buyers towards the supplier im-
which are the purchasers, have expectations that
plementation of a quality management system
are aimed at the continuous development of the
based on the guidelines contained in the
suppliers' potential, thanks to which it is possible to
International Or- ganization for Standardization
improve the efficiency and effectiveness of
(ISO) 9001 standard focus on the supplier ensuring
processes in the supply chains (Basu et al. 2018,
the required parameters for products, as well as on
Hawkins, et al. 2020; Ratkiewicz and Walczak,
improving operational processes. In some sectors,
2022). The fulfillment of these expectations is
the requirements placed on suppliers in the field of
verified both through supplier self-assessment
quality management do not only concern
cards (which are used in particular by interna-
compliance with the guidelines contained in the
tional concerns) and through supplier audits per-
ISO 9001 standard (Huq et al. 2016). The
formed by buyers (recipients) or on their behalf.
dissemination of the concept of corporate social
The verification of the expectations of the
responsibility results in an ever wider range of
purchasing enterprises is increasingly based on
expectations towards partners who are the source of
multi-criteria evaluation (Min et al. 2018). It can
purchases in terms of limiting their nega- tive
also be observed that many international concerns,
impact on the natural environment (Gupta et al.
when assessing potential partners, also follow the
2019). For this reason, more and more enterprises
guidelines related to the principles of corporate
expect suppliers to implement environmental man-
social responsibility (Asif et al. 2019). The initial
agement system based on the guidelines contained
comprehensive assessment is conducted by
in the ISO 14001 standard (Kumar et al. 2019,
analyzing the data contained in the self-assessment
Saghiri and Mirzabeiki 2021). It can also be ob-
cards provided by suppliers in terms of detailed
served that the increasing level of awareness of
requirements relating to the guidelines contained in
business entities that are customers concerns the
international quality, environmental and safety
risk of threats related to products and processes
management standards (Schulte and Hall- stedt
implemented in supply chains. Risk mitigation in
2018). The credibility of the data contained in the
relation to processes has a broad scope, as it relates
self-assessment questionnaires is verified by au-
to ensuring occupational health and safety,
diting the suppliers (Nikoofal and Gümüs 2020).
information, or the entire supply chain. Due to the
Particularly important for industrial buyers who
prospect of shap- ing long-term partnerships
purchase raw materials, parts, components and
between business entities, the legal and financial
infrastructure elements is the technical quality,
situation of suppliers is also important. Assessment
which should be conducted by taking into account
of the legal and financial situation of suppliers is
the criteria relating to product safety (Yazdani et
conducted through due-dili- gence, which is the
al., 2022). Technical quality assessment by
investigation of ownership inter- est, fulfillment of
customers is ac- complished through a comparative
legal obligations, level of profita- bility, financial
laboratory analysis of samples from potential
liquidity, shares in other enterprises, type and scope
suppliers and assessment of their compliance with
of insurance policies and financial guarantees. The
the required technical specification, trial purchase,
above-mentioned expectations are taken into
free temporary use (in relation to machines and
account by enterprises as criteria for qualifying
devices) and by collecting opinions from current
and evaluating suppliers. This evaluation is based
users (during the so-called reference visits). When
on the experience of cooperation (Salwin et al.,
evaluating suppliers, complaints (qualitative,
2022; Benton Jr. et al. 2020).
quantitative, errors in docu- ments), the timeliness
and flexibility of deliveries (in
Urbaniak, M., Zimon, D., Madzik, P., 159
Based on the above considerations, it can be con-

partners in the supply chain (Kumar et al. 2018).
cluded that manufacturing companies use a number
For these reasons, OEMs expect suppliers to
of different systems to improve not only their oper-
implement these tools to improve efficiency
ational processes, but but they also recommend
(shortening the cy- cle of process) and efficiency
them to their suppliers for mutual benefit -
(they reduced costs) of their activities (Praxmarer-
improving the quality of the product and the quality
Carus et al. 2013). It is increasingly being
of order fulfillment in suply chains (Li and Chen,
recognized that the creation of a competitive
2019; Savic et al., 2017). Moreover, on the basis of
advantage requires industrial customers to build
the requirements contained in the management
relationships with suppliers, which mani- fests itself
systems, manufacturing companies formulate
in joint projects. These projects focus on the
requirements for their suppliers (Zimon and
implementation of product innovations (improv-
Madzík, 2020). This situation is quite
ing the technical parameters of existing and imple-
understandable because, as Purwanto and Juliana
mentation of a completely new product) and
(2022) points out, the development of suppliers
contribute to the improvement of organizational
contributes to an increase in the efficiency of the
performance as well as process efficiency through
supply chain. Considering more broadly the issue
reducing costs by increasing employee
of proper relations with suppliers, it can be no-
productivity, infrastructure capacity, and
ticed that for many companies, relations with
eliminating wastes (Xu et al. 2017). More and more
suppliers are not limited only to imposing strict
often it can be seen by partners combining Six
requirements on them and continuous monitoring
Sigma methodologies with the Lean Management
of meeting expectations. When taking action
approach referred to as Lean Six Sigma. Many joint
aimed at improving processes and products, many
Lean Management projects are also aimed at
business entities also involve their suppliers in
improving the environmental impact (Kumar and
these activities, especially in the field of
Rodrigues 2020, Garcia-Buendia, et al. 2021).
implementing system tools, offering them special
These projects are known as Green Lean
support programs referred to as supplier
Management and focus on reducing consumption
development programs / vendor development
(raw materials, energy, water, consumables) and re-
programs (Kumar and Routroy 2017, Kumar and
ducing waste and emissions (gases, noise,
Routroy 2018). Through these programs, mutu- ally
radiation). These initiatives are aimed at improving
beneficial relationships based on win-win prin-
common processes and developing concepts for
ciples are built (Proch et al. 2017). The programs
improving products (Wang et al. 2020). For many
are implemented through training and consultancy in
companies, relationships with suppliers are not
the field of product quality assurance,
limited to imposing their stringent requirements
implementation of system tools in terms of
and continuous improvement on sustaining
improving environmental impact and improving
development (Talay et al. 2020).There is a number
process safety. Consulting and training are
of studies focusing on the impact of the
provided by delegated specialist, employed in
management systems implementation on the
positions such as supplier development advisors,
functioning of production enterprises. (Zi- valjevic
supplier development supervisor, supplier
et al., 2022). However, there are not enough studies
development project manager, supplier development
that would address the issue of requirements
engineers, supplier quality engineers or project
imposed by manufacturing companies on their sup-
managers focused on the development of partners.
pliers in terms of improving their internal processes
OEMs realizing supplier development programs are
stimulated by the implementation of standardized
increasingly focused on ensuring the continuity of
management systems. Therefore, it seems reasona-
flows (products and information) and improving
ble to ask what processes are particularly important
the efficiency and effectiveness of processes
for manufacturing companies in the context of their
conducted in supply chains. In this regard, they use
relations with suppliers? The article fills the
process improvement tools such as Toyota
research gap in the literature. The research results
Production System elements (like Kaizen, 5S, Total
presented in the literature so far have focused on
Productive Mainte- nance, Poka Yoke, SMED), the
the expectations of enterprises towards suppliers
Lean Management concept or Six Sigma
in terms of meeting the criteria for their initial and
methodologies (Golmoham- madi et al. 2018). The
periodic assessment (Almeida et al., 2018; Savic
implementation of these tools is more and more
et al., 2017; Gordon,2005). The research results
often treated as joint projects of
presented in the
article focused on presenting the expectations of

based on the risk management concept described in
manufacturers (who have implemented a quality
ISO 31000 (de Oliveira et al. 2017). The ISO 9001
management system) towards suppliers in terms of
standard provides guidelines for companies that
improving their processes. The expectations
may constitute the expectations of suppliers in
towards suppliers in terms of improving their
terms of processes related to the product realization
processes were presented from the perspective of
such as customer service, design and development,
the requirements set by enterprises (producers) that
purchasing, production, delivery, as well as
have implemented a quality management system
product and process control. Effective
consistent with the guidelines of the international
implementation of these guidelines requires
standard ISO 9001. This approach to
suppliers to define:
manufacturers' expectations towards suppliers
 the risk relating to products and processes,
should, to a greater extent, to shape positive
relationships and cooperation between partners by  the specifications for purchased materials and
improving the quality of products and processes. infrastructure,
This approach should be considered new, because  the goals and principles of implementing oper-
the results of such research have not been pre- ational processes,
sented in the literature so far. The aim of the article  the product evaluation criteria (quality control)
focuses on identifying manufacturers' expectations and processes (effectiveness and efficiency),
towards suppliers regarding the improvement of  the rules for identifying and traceability of
their processes products, processes, infrastructure, process
The article has the following structure. Sections 1 par- ticipants.
and 2 provide the theoretical background. Section 3 The scope of controls defined by the guidelines
presents a description of the research methodology which contained ISO 9001 standard as well as re-
and an analysis of the data obtained. Finally, sec- quired by buyers relates to the acceptance assess-
tions 4 and 5 present the discussion, conclusions, ment of the purchased materials / infrastructure ele-
implications, and limitations of this study. ments, the assessment undertaken at individual
stages of product processing, and the final assess-
2. Expectations towards suppliers regarding ment of the finished product. Customer require-
the implementation of quality management ments for product quality control may also include
system and the improvement of products activities with the assessment of technical parame-
and processes ters, qualifying suitable infrastructure and suitable
The technical quality of products is of particular equipment for measuring and monitoring the
importance in building relationships in supply quality of products, as well as assessing the
chains (Negash et al. 2020). The technical quality qualifications of persons controlling and deciding
assurance of products is based on strict compliance on the status of the product evaluation.
with legal requirements relating to safety. These The scope of controls required by buyers relates to
requirements are included in European Union the acceptance assessment of the supplies of pur-
directives and technical standards. Ensuring chased goods (materials / infrastructure elements),
technical quality of products also requires special the assessment conducted at the product processing
supervision over the operational processes related stages, and the final assessment of the finished
to product implementation such as customer product (Makinde et al. 2020). The above scope
service, product design and development, of control determines the safety of products
purchasing, manufacturing and delivering products delivered to customers. It is important in the event
to buyers. Important guidelines in this regard have of a complaint (O’Connor et al. 2020). Control
been defined in the international quality records, evaluation status, and product
management standard ISO 9001 (Su et al. 2020). identification at each stage allow suppliers to
The assumption of this standard is that the quality identify the exact cause of the noncon- formity. It
of manufactured products is controlled in the opera- can also be observed that many Original Equipment
tional processes. For this reason, organizations that Manufacturers require from their suppliers special
are buyers in supply chains often require their sup- controls over the research and development
pliers to implement the requirements of ISO 9001 processes (Wlazlak et al. 2018). Each stage of
(Castka 2018). The latest issue of this document research and development work on new and modi-
was fied products must be documented by appropriate
records (formulas, drawings, test results of proto-

test was used to test whether organizations statisti-
types, validation results. Such control records
cally differ in these expectations with regard to the
allows the certainty/surety of a high level of
monitored classification variables (e.g. capital,
product safety (Taifouris et al. 2020). This applies
managerial system, etc.). The relationships
in particular to suppliers for the automotive,
between the monitored expectations (that is,
aviation and railway sectors as well as medical
between the measured variables) were examined
devices. These sectors require very close
through bivariate correlation analysis, in which the
cooperation between OEMs and suppliers in R&D
intensity of the relationships was analyzed
projects (Franke et al. 2018).
through Pearson's linear correlation coefficient.
Exploratory factor analysis was used to examine
3. Methodology
the possibility of the existence of latent factors
The subject of the conducted research was to define
that would explain the correlation structure between
the processes which the suppliers expect to be im-
the expectations of the manufacturer. The factor
proved by the surveyed industrial enterprises. The
simply represents a broader group of variables
research was conducted using the Computer As-
between which the correlation relations are very
sisted Telephone Interview (CATI) technique. The
intense. In other words, a factor can be considered
research covered 150 production medium and large
an abstract construct in this case, which is not
size companies (employing over 50 people) who
directly measured (like the measured variables), but
were suppliers for enterprises from the automotive,
can relatively reli- ably represent those variables
electromechanical and chemical sectors operating
linked to it. The suitability of the data was
in the Polish industrial market. The respondents in
checked through the Kaiser- Meyer-Olkin
the study were managers and specialists from
Measure of Sampling Adequacy (KMO) and
purchasing or quality management departments.
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity. Principal Component
The expectations of production companies
Analysis was used as an extraction method using
towards their suppliers regarding improvement of
Varimax factor rotation. The Kaiser- Guttman rule
processes concept were assigned a rank on a scale
was used to choose the optimal number of factors,
from one (the least important criterion) to five (the
based on which it was determined that the number
most significant). The study was commissioned to a
of factors is equal to the number of factors with
specialized research agency that conducted a
eigenvalues greater than 1.0. The factors were
targeted selection of companies registered in the
subsequently named and briefly interpreted.
Bisnode database, which is a business directory
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) is one of the
search platform.
standard statistical procedures aimed at multivariate
The data structure based on the processing of the
analysis – that is, in cases where several variables
questionnaires is shown in table 1. This table con-
investigate a single phenomenon. It is one of the
tains a list of the variables used and their code des-
most widespread methods for the exploration of
ignation, which was used in evaluating the results.
new phenomena, and the EFA procedure has
At the same time, there is a measure of a particular
developed quite well in practice (Costello and
variable in the table. The Capital variable was a
Osborne, 2005). In the supply chain research area,
nominal measure with two options – Polish and for-
the use of EFA was verified in several studies,
eign. Number of employees was measured on two
which were aimed, for example, at examining
levels (50-249 employees and more than 250 em-
critical success factors of additive manufacturing
ployees). A nominal measure with a dichotomous
for higher sustainable competitive advantage in
character (yes/no) was used for the types of imple-
supply chains (Singh et al., 2023) at evaluating
mented systems. Other variables that had an ordinal
the impacts of Covid-19 on supply chain
measure were measured using a 5-point Likert
transformation (Min, 2023), or on the adoption
scale. Statistical analyses were processed using
of new technologies in supply chains like
IBM SPSS Statistics and Minitab software. In the
blockchain (Mukherjee et al., 2023). EFA is one of
initial stages of the analysis, descriptive statistics
the appropriate statistical tools that allow us to ex-
procedures were used to describe the primary
amine the internal structure of a little-known area,
results regarding the sample and the main
which makes EFA one of the most suitable tools for
expectations of manufacturing companies. In a
our research.
later analysis, a 2-sample t-
4. Results
veyed enterprises. Among the surveyed organiza-
The sample consisted of 150 organizations. Their
tions, 57% belonged to large and 43% to medium-
structure can be found in Figure 1. While analyzing
sized enterprises (classified on the basis of the
the data contained in Figure 1, we note that more
number of employees). Moreover, 61% of them
than half of the surveyed companies have imple-
were enterprises with Polish capital and 39% with
mented the requirements of the ISO 14001
foreign capital. The surveyed companies operated
standard, while Kaizen is used by 26% of them.
mainly in the automotive, chemical and
Other systems, such as industry systems or Lean
metallurgical indus- tries.
Manage- ment, were implemented by only a few of
the sur- Table 1. Overview of variables
Variable Code Measure
Capital Capital Nominal
Number of employees Size Ordinal
ISO 9001 ISO_9001 Nominal
Sector system SectorSystem Nominal
ISO 14001 ISO_14001 Nominal
ISO 45001 ISO 45001 Nominal
Kaizen 5S/ TMP Kaizen Nominal
Lean Management Lean Nominal
Sector Sector Nominal
Product design process ProdDes Ordinal
The supplier's ordering process SuppOrd Ordinal
Vendor selection process VendSel Ordinal
Process of periodic evaluation of suppliers SuppEva Ordinal
Quality control of the accepted delivery QCDel Ordinal
Control of compliance of the accepted delivery with the order QCOrdDel Ordinal
Accepting orders from customers AccOrd Ordinal
Process of technical preparation of production TechnPre Ordinal
Production planning process ProdPlan Ordinal
Production Production Ordinal
Maintenance Maint Ordinal
Quality control of the production process QCProdProc Ordinal
Quality control of the finished product QCFinProd Ordinal
Packing Packing Ordinal
Product storage in a consignment warehouse ProdStor Ordinal
The process of delivering to the customer CustDel Ordinal
Installing the product at the customer's site ProdInst Ordinal
Training and consultancy related to the use of the product Train Ordinal
Technical service TechServ Ordinal
Complaints service CompServ Ordinal
Waste disposal WastDisp Ordinal
meta l; 36;
24%
50-249
automotive;
63; 42% employees;
65; 43%
Sector Size 250
employees
and more; 85;
57%
chemical; 51;
34%
Lean 24
Kaizen 39
Management system
Foreign; 59;
39% OHSAS_18001 12
Capital
ISO_14001 76
Polish; 92;
61%
SectorSystem 10
ISO_9001 148
0 50 100 150 200

Fig. 1. Main characteristics of the sample
Before the actual evaluation of the results, we by QCDel (Quality control of the accepted
tested the validity of the data. Non-response bias delivery), QCFinProd (Quality control of the
was tested by splitting the sample into early (n=71) finished product) and QCOrdDel (Control of
and late (n=79). We then randomly selected ten compliance of the accepted delivery with the
variables between these groups. The results of the order). All these variables relate to quality control,
t-test reached a p-value higher than 0.05, indicating which is an interesting find- ing. It is, therefore,
a lack of non-response bias. Scale reliability of 21 evident that quality control plays a critical role in in
ordinal variables was performed by individual building proper relationships with suppliers.
investigation. Cronbach's alpha reached 0.925, It can be observed that companies operating in the
which indicates a high level of reliability. In the production sectors, while improving their
suitability test of the variables, we noted only processes, also require actions in this area towards
insignificant improvements that would have suppliers. The results of these studies indicate that
occurred if we excluded the given variable from the the expectations of production companies towards
analysis - Table 2. However, by excluding it, we suppliers focus primarily on ensuring and
would have lost a much higher in- terpretive improving the technical quality of products. For
ability, so we kept all the variables in the analysis. this reason, the expectations of the surveyed
Figure 2 shows an overview of the average values business entities towards suppliers relate primarily
of expectations of manufacturing companies for to the improvement of the effectiveness of control
suppliers regarding the improvement of their processes (acceptance of deliveries, production,
processes. The result shows that the respondents finished products) in order to avoid the risk of
assigned high values to almost all variables - product non-compliance.
usually higher average values than 4. The highest
values were achieved
Table 2. Testing of reliability if item deleted

Scale Mean if Item Scale Variance if Corrected Item-Total Cronbach's Alpha if
Variable
Deleted Item Deleted Correlation Item Deleted
ProdDes 87,500 103,206 0,793 0,917
SuppOrd 87,333 109,647 0,328 0,928
VendSel 87,222 112,301 0,261 0,928
SuppEva 87,444 103,908 0,675 0,920
QCDel 87,000 105,059 0,771 0,918
QCOrdDel 87,000 105,765 0,723 0,919
AccOrd 87,556 102,732 0,675 0,920
TechnPre 87,111 112,340 0,476 0,924
ProdPlan 87,333 103,765 0,777 0,918
Production 87,333 108,941 0,463 0,924
Maint 87,611 101,663 0,805 0,917
QCProdProc 87,167 109,206 0,633 0,921
QCFinProd 87,000 109,647 0,532 0,922
Packing 87,278 107,859 0,650 0,920
ProdStor 87,833 100,971 0,636 0,921
CustDel 87,000 109,647 0,624 0,921
ProdInst 87,500 111,088 0,366 0,926
Train 87,722 107,977 0,614 0,921
TechServ 87,056 112,526 0,378 0,925
CompServ 86,889 112,575 0,420 0,924
WastDisp 87,444 100,732 0,853 0,915
Fig. 2. Results of variables analysis

We also monitored the implemented management

system in the sample of organizations. It must be ISO 14001 = “1” ; without ISO 14001 = “0”). In the
said that almost all the companies involved had an very bottom part of the picture, there is a
ISO 9001 system implemented. However, several calculation of the power of the test - that is, the
of them also had other systems implemented. Using detection ability of the test allows the identification
a 2 Sample t-test, we examined whether of statistically significant differences. Detection
organizations that implemented particular power is largely determined by sample size.
managerial systems reported higher values for We included six management tools in the analysis -
individual variables. An example of the analysis ISO 9001, Sector system, ISO 14001, ISO 45001,
can be found in Figure 3 (Fig.3.A. and Fig.3.B.) In Kaizen, and Lean Management. At the same time,
the upper part of the Fig- ure 3, there can be seen a we added capital to the analysis. In total, seven as-
graphical interpretation of the differences between pects were analyzed for all 21 variables. The analy-
the analyzed groups - in the sample, there can be sis, which can be found in Figure 3, was thus re-
seen the differences in the Prod- Des response for peated 154 times (7x21). Its results can be found in
organizations that had implemented ISO 14001 Table 3.
(value 1) and those that had not implemented ISO The table 3 contains values representing the differ-
14001 (value 0). At the same time, the exact values ence between the average reported by companies
of two samples (with ISO 14001 and without ISO with a particular system and the average of compa-
14001) and the calculated differ- ence between nies without a particular system. Among the re-
samples can be found on the left side. At the spondents were organizations that implemented
bottom of the Figure 3, two run charts show the var- ious management systems. The table 3 shows,
time-ordered results (for anomaly analysis) of the that to significant results between companies using
monitored variable ProdDes for the two moni- dif- ferent management systems. These differences
tored groups of manufacturers (with will be discussed further in the discussion section.
Fig. 3.A. Example of testing differences by 2 Sample t-test

Fig. 3.B. Example of testing differences by 2 Sample t-test
Table 3. Differences of average values related to system (non)implementation

Variable Capital ISO_9001 SectorSystem ISO_14001 ISO 45001 Kaizen Lean
ProdDes 0,441* NA - 0,405* 0,447* - 0,622**
SuppOrd - NA - - - 0,399* 0,456*
VendSel - NA - - - - -
SuppEva - - - 0,388* - 0,422* 0,370*
QCDel - NA - 0,184* - - 0,202*
QCOrdDel - - - - - - -
AccOrd 0,301* - - - - - -
TechnPre - NA 0,524** - 0,476** 0,293* 0,412**
ProdPlan - - 0,491** - - - -
Production 0,230* - 0,387* - 0,413** 0,375** -
Maint - NA - - - - -
QCProdProc - NA 0,220* - - - -
QCFinProd - NA NA - - - NA
Packing - - - - - - -
ProdStor 0,564** - - 0,386* - - -
CustDel - - - 0,307* - - -
ProdInst - - - - - - -
Train - NA - 0,402* 0,577** - -
TechServ - NA - 0,340* 0,319* - -
CompServ - NA - 0,222* 0,316** - -
WastDisp - - 0,691** 0,490** 0,627** - -
NA – not available (not enough data); * p<0,05 ; ** p<0,01.
The correlation structure was examined to

tive potential of factor analysis. Each row of the ta-
determine whether there are latent patterns among
ble shows the results of the measure of explained
the 21 variables. Bivariate linear correlation
variability if a specific number of factors were ex-
analysis was used, while the Pearson correlation
tracted. So, for example, if we were to extract only
coefficient was chosen as the primary metric. The
one factor (the first row of the table), it would be
results of the intensity of interrelationships between
able to explain 26% of the variability, which is in-
variables can be found in Figure 4.
sufficient. If we were to extract two factors, the rate
The correlation analysis results indicate a rather
of explained variability would be 48.58%. This was
complex correlation structure between the
done until such a number of factors were identified
variables, which could indicate the existence of
that the eigenvalue was higher than 1. In our case, it
latent factors. We, therefore, explored such a
was in a situation where we extracted four factors
possibility through factor analysis - the results are
from the data. Together, they explain up to 79.67%
found in Table 4.
of the variability, which is a sufficiently high level
Table 4 shows the level of explained variability in
for later interpretation of the data. Table 5 shows
the case of the application of exploratory factor
the rotated factor matrix.
analysis. This is a standard way of checking the
interpre-
Fig. 4. Correlation map of analyzed variables Table 4.
Results of factor analysis

Extraction Sums Rotation Sums
Initial Eigenvalues of Squared Loadings
Factor of Squared Loadings
Total % of Var. Cum. % Total % of Var. Cum. % Total % of Var. Cum. %
1 9,11 43,37 43,37 9,11 43,37 43,37 5,49 26,14 26,14
2 3,55 16,91 60,28 3,55 16,91 60,28 4,71 22,44 48,58
3 2,37 11,27 71,55 2,37 11,27 71,55 3,34 15,91 64,49
4 1,71 8,13 79,67 1,71 8,13 79,67 3,19 15,18 79,67
5 0,93 4,43 84,10
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
21 <0,00 <0,00 100,00
Table 5. Rotated factor matrix

Variable/factor Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4
QCFinProd 0,841 0,061 0,239 -0,071
QCOrdDel 0,838 0,281 -0,047 0,319
TechServ 0,800 0,115 -0,047 -0,224
CustDel 0,772 0,374 0,074 -0,070
CompServ 0,734 -0,216 0,583 -0,129
QCDel 0,693 0,500 -0,156 0,417
ProdDes 0,644 0,410 0,048 0,463
Train 0,581 0,513 0,011 0,055
Packing 0,097 0,836 0,233 0,105
AccOrd 0,225 0,830 0,162 0,092
ProdStor 0,360 0,810 0,148 -0,148
ProdInst 0,072 0,748 -0,146 -0,045
ProdPlan 0,137 0,719 0,445 0,318
WastDisp 0,479 0,499 0,357 0,424
Production -0,036 0,197 0,919 0,161
TechnPre -0,115 0,167 0,787 0,437
QCProdProc 0,457 0,077 0,726 0,195
Maint 0,164 0,525 0,568 0,532
VendSel -0,133 -0,064 0,257 0,832
SuppOrd -0,059 0,010 0,279 0,773
SuppEva 0,598 0,156 0,016 0,683
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis; Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization; a Rotation con-
verged in 17 iterations.
Four factors could be named based on the intensity

 Factor 4 (Supplier supervision) – consists
of their relationships to specific risk factors. In
mainly of following variables: VendSel, Sup-
nam- ing, the internal meaning of risk factors was
pOrd, SuppEva. This factor concentrates pro-
considered, and a search was done for common
cesses related to maintaining proper relations
features of those variables that formed a group
with suppliers.
belonging to a specific factor. The resulting factors
are as follows:
5. Discussion and implications
 Factor 1 (Logistics customer service) –
The research results indicate that representatives of
consists mainly of following variables:
manufacturing companies set high expectations re-
QCFinProd, QCOrdDel, TechServ, CustDel,
garding all aspects examine (usually higher average
CompServ, QCDel, ProdDes, Train. This
values than 4 in five-point scale). The results of
factor includes elements related to the broadly
empirical research, it should be stated that the
understood logistics customer service (in all
expectations of production companies towards
its phases) and processes related to the
suppliers focus primarily on ensuring and
delivery of the service to the customer.
improving the technical quality of products. For
 Factor 2 (Supervision over property customer) this reason, the expectations of the surveyed
– consists mainly of following variables: business entities towards suppliers relate primarily
Pack- ing, AccOrd, ProdStor, ProdInst, to the improvement of the effectiveness of control
ProdPlan, WastDisp. This factor includes processes (quality control of the accepted delivery,
processes related to communication with the quality control of the finished product and control
client and proper supervision over his of compliance of the accepted delivery with the
property, order) in order to avoid the risk of product non-
 Factor 3 (Production monitoring) – consists compliance. In the case of non-compliance by
mainly of following variables: Production, customers, complaint proceedings are initi- ated.
TechnPre, QCProdProc, Maint. This factor co- On the other hand, if product non-conformities are
vers processes primarily related to improving not detected, emergency situations (such as acci-
the effectiveness of control processes in order dents during product processing / use, or threats to
to avoid the risk of non-conformity of
products.
the environment) may occur. It can also be seen

TechnPre and Production. This is due to the expec-
that the expectations of enterprises towards
tation of avoiding nonconformities and implement-
suppliers focus on the improvement of their
ing improvement actions by suppliers. Companies
processes related to production (planning, technical
that implement Lean projects strongly associate their
preparation, processing, product packaging,
expectations towards suppliers with such processes
maintenance). These expectations also apply to the
as: ProdDes, SuppOrd, SuppEva, QCDel,
improvement of cooperation between partners and
TechnPre. This is due to the expectations of
building partnerships with them (Lettice, Wyatt,
improving efficiency and effectiveness by
Evans 2010). For this reason, the expectations of
suppliers.
manufacturers are strongly focused on the initial
The deepening of the research process made it pos-
and periodic assessment of sub-suppliers, as well
sible to identify four factors that are particularly
as effective communication with customers
important for manufacturing companies. The first
(complaint handling, order acceptance, training and
two of them covered aspects related to the proper
advice related to the use of the product).
implementation of customer logistics and
The research process also allowed for the
supervision over customer property. The indication
identification of differences between respondents
of these factors may be due to the fact that most of
resulting from the implementation of different
the surveyed enterprises have implemented the
management standards. Based on this, we observed
requirements of the ISO 9001 standard, which
that organizations which had implemented
strongly emphasizes the need to fully focus on
SectorSystem attach higher importance to five
customer service. (Fonseca et al., 2022; Tomic and
areas: TechnPre; Prod- Plan; Production;
Brkic, 2018). The third and fourth factors covered
QCProdProc; WasteDisp. These attributes well
aspects related to ensuring the proper course of
characterize the main steps of the production
production processes and maintaining relations
process flow, which means, that the scope of sector
with suppliers. These aspects are un- doubtedly
systems includes a holistic approach to the most
important for ensuring the continuity of product
important logistics subsystems in supply chains
supply. In addition, their mutual relationships are
(Kanan, 2023). Interesting findings are also
important as it recognizes Su et al. (2020) ISO 9001
provided by looking at the expectations of
is more effective when firms are well em- bedded
organizations implementing ISO 14001. Such
in the supply chain network and least effective
organizations had higher expectations in nine areas:
when they are isolated. Therefore, manufacturing
ProdDes; SuppEva; QCDel; ProdStor; CustDel;
companies seem to take special care of the cor- rect
train; Tech- Serv; CompServ; WastDisp. Such
implementation of key processes from the cus-
results could be explained by the fact that ISO
tomer's point of view and the reliability of the main
14001 is a system that goes beyond the
processes.
organization and covers many areas from its
The conducted research provides insight into the at-
external environment (Zimon et al., 2020). The
titude of manufacturing companies towards their
more interested parties the system takes into ac-
suppliers. This study suggests that manufacturing
count, the more requirements these stakeholders
companies that implement management systems
must meet. Thus, according to our results, the
place high demands on their suppliers, but not all
fulfillment of requirements can be transferred to
aspects are equally important. Moreover, the
expectations towards suppliers. In the case of
integration of the quality management system
buyers who envisaged an occupational health and
according to the ISO 9001 standard with other
safety system compliant with the requirements of
systems affects the assessment of individual
ISO 45001, the expectations towards suppliers are
expectations of production companies towards
particularly focused on improving the processes
suppliers. Entrepreneurs who have implemented the
of ProdDes, Tech- nPre, Production, Train,
requirements of the ISO 14001 standard prioritize
TechServ, CompServ, WastDisp. It can therefore
expectations towards suppliers differently than
be indicated that the expectations of these
entrepreneurs who have not implemented this
enterprises are related to the improvement of
standard or have decided to implement other
process safety by suppliers (Medina Serrano et al.,
systems. Based on the obtained research results, 4
2019). Respondents who have implemented the
basic factors were also identified, contain- ing
Kaizen concept clearly expect the improvement of
particularly important requirements for suppli-
such processes as SuppOrd, SuppEva,
ers. In addition, it can be stated that the

results. The results we achieved can, therefore, only
implementation of management systems creates a
be generalized to culturally similar countries such
framework for managers to formulate requirements
as Poland. Another limitation is the sample size –
towards their suppliers. Manufacturer standards
150 organizations participated in the survey. From
become required supplier expectations. Only in this
a statistical point of view, this is the average
way is the supplier ready to meet the
sample size, where the average detection capability
manufacturer's expectations regarding the technical
for statistical deviation analysis or statistical
quality of the ordered product. This is important
hypothesis testing must be taken into account.
because coordination and cooperation in the
Thus, the sample meant that we were only able to
supply chain as well as setting clear requirements
identify medium and large differences in responses,
for suppliers contribute to the increase in the
while smaller ones may have gone undetected.
efficiency of customer service. Based on the
Despite these limitations, it must be said that this
obtained research results, managers of
study is exploratory and aims to explore a new area.
organizations supplying manufacturing companies
In such cases, such a sample is usually sufficient,
can obtain important information that will be used
especially when it comes to nar- row focused
to improve processes that are important from the
studies (Rumanti et al., 2021; Antony et al., 2021).
point of view of their recipients. On this basis, they
Presented in the article research can be considered
can make optimal allocation of resources and
an initial step in the wider context of the research
modify the management style to improve
program. The authors intend to conduct research on
cooperation with manufacturing companies. The
a larger scale in the future, taking into account
conducted research process can also be an
companies operating in Eastern and Central
inspiration for researchers who would like to
Europe. The authors also hope that the presented
deepen the research process with management sys-
results will be an impulse for researchers to take up
tems not discussed in this publication or treat the
and develop the problems indicated in the article.
article as a starting point for further research in
this important area. References
[1] Almeida, D., Pradhan, N., & Muniz Jr, J.
6. Conclusions
(2018). Assessment of ISO 9001: 2015 imple-
The considerations undertaken in this article confirm
mentation factors based on AHP: Case study in
that in order to compete on the modern market,
Brazilian automotive sector. International Jour-
close cooperation and cooperation within the
nal of Quality & Reliability Management,
supply chain are needed. Representatives of the
35(7), 1343-1359.
surveyed manufacturing companies notice this https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-12-2016-0228.
fact and set high expectations for their suppliers in
[2] Antony, J., McDermott, O., Sony, M., Fernan-
virtually all the surveyed aspects. The research
des, M.M. and Ribeiro, R.V.C. (2021). A study
shows that suppliers must pay special attention to
on the Ishikawa's original basic tools of quality
the implementation of processes related to ensuring
control in South American companies: results
and improving the technical quality of products by
from a pilot survey and directions for further
focusing on improving control and supervision
research. The TQM Journal, 33(8), 1770-
processes and logistical aspects of customer
1786. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-01-2021-
service. Proper implementation and improvement
0004.
of these processes requires a methodical approach.
[3] Asif, M., Jajja, M.S.S., Searcy, C. (2019). So-
For this reason, many enterprises require their
cial compliance standards: Re-evaluating the
suppliers to implement a quality management
buyer and supplier perspective. Journal of
system in which the sequential stages of quality
Cleaner Production, 227, 457-471.
control should be conducted with due care. It is also
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.157.
worth mentioning that proper relations with
[4] Basu, A., Jain, T., Hazra, J. (2018). Supplier
suppliers mean not only setting requirements for
selection under production learning and
them, but also establishing lasting mutual coopera-
process improvements. International Journal of
tion.
Produc- tion Economics, 204, 411–420.
The article has several limitations. Firstly, the sam-
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.08.015.
ple consists of companies from Poland, therefore
economy, politics and culture could have
influenced
[5] Benton Jr., W.C., Prahinski, C., Fan, Y.

[14] Gupta, S., Soni, U., Kumar, G. (2019). Green
(2020). The influence of supplier development
supplier selection using multi-criterion
programs on supplier performance.
decision making under fuzzy environment: A
International Journal of Production Economics,
case study in automotive industry. Computers
230, 107793.
& Industrial Engineering, 136,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107793.
663–680.
[6] Castka, P. (2018). Modelling firms’ interven-
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.07.038.
tions in ISO 9001 certification: A configura-
[15] Hawkins, T.G., Gravierb, M.J., Muir, W.A.
tional approach. International Journal of Pro-
(2020). The role of supplier performance
duction Economics, 201, 163–172.
evalu- ations in mitigating risk: Assessing
evaluation processes and behaviors, Industrial
[7] Costello, A., & Osborne, J.W. (2005). Best
Marketing Management, 87, 2–17.
practices in exploratory factor analysis: four
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmar-
recommendations for getting the most from
man.2020.03.004.
your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research
[16] Huq, F.A., Chowdhury, I.N., Klassen, R.D.
and Evaluation, 10(1), 1-9.
(2016). Social management capabilities of mul-
https://doi.org/10.7275/jyj1-4868.
tinational buying firms and their emerging
[8] de Oliveira, U.R., Marins, F.A.S., Rocha, H.M,
market suppliers: An exploratory study of the
Salomon, V.A.P. (2017). The ISO 31000
cloth- ing industry. Journal of Operations
standard in supply chain risk management.
Manage- ment, 46, 19-37.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 151, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2016.07.005.
616-633.
[17] Kanan, M. (2023). Investigating the relation-
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.054.
ship between information quality, system qual-
[9] Fonseca, L. M., Cardoso, M. C., & Nóvoa, M.
ity, service quality, and supply chain perfor-
H. (2022). Motivations for ISO 9001 quality
mance in the manufacturing sector of Saudi
management system implementation and certi-
Arabia: An empirical study. Uncertain Supply
fication–mapping the territory with a novel
Chain Management, 11(4), 1589-1598.
classification proposal. International Journal of https://doi.org/10.5267/j.uscm.2023.7.010.
Quality and Service Sciences, 14(1), 18-36.
[18] Kumar, A., Cantor, D. E., & Grimm, C. M.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQSS-02-2021-0031.
(2019). The impact of a supplier’s environmen-
[10] Franke, M., Hribernik, K.A., Thoben, K.-D.
tal management concerns on a buyer’s environ-
(2018). An approach to support reliable test
mental reputation: The moderating role of rela-
processes between suppliers and OEM.
tionship criticality and firm size.
Procedia Manufacturing, 16, 83-90.
Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.10.176.
Transportation Review, 122,
[11] Garcia-Buendia, N., Moyano-Fuentes, J., Ma-
448-462.
queira-Marín, J.M. (2021). Lean supply chain https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2019.01.001.
management and performance relationships:
[19] Kumar, A., Cantorb, D.E., Grimm, C.M.
what has been done and what is left to do.
(2019). The impact of a supplier’s environmen-
CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and
tal management concerns on a buyer’s environ-
Technol- ogy, 32, 405–423.
mental reputation: The moderating role of rela-
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirpj.2021.01.016.
tionship criticality and firm size.
[12] Golmohammadi, A., Taghavi, M., Farivar, S.,
Transportation Research Part E, 122, 448–462.
Azad, N. (2018). Three strategies for engaging
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2019.01.001.
a buyer in supplier development efforts. Inter-
[20] Kumar, C. S., & Routroy, S. (2017). Analyzing
national Journal of Production Economics,
a manufacturer’s returns from supplier
206, 1–14.
development programs. Materials Today:
Proceedings, 4(2), 2255-2262.
[13] Gordon, S. (2005). Seven steps to measure https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2017.02.073.
supplier performance. Quality Progress,
[21] Kumar, C. S., Routroy, S., & Mishra, R. K.
38(8), 20-
(2018). Lean supplier management for better
25.
cost structures. Materials Today: Proceedings,
5(9), 18941-18945.
[31] Min, X, Chao, F., Nan-Ping, F., Guang-Yan,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2018.06.244.
L., Wen-Jun, Ch., Shan-Lin, Y. (2018).
[22] Kumar, C. V. S., Routroy, S. (2017). Evaluation of supplier performance of high-
Analyzing a manufacturer’s returns from speed train based on multi-stage multi-criteria
supplier development programs. Materials decision- making method. Knowledge-Based
Today: Proceedings, 4(2), 2255-2262. Systems, 162, 238–251.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2018.07.013.
[23] Kumar, C. V. S., Routroy, S. (2017).
[32] Mukherjee, S., Baral, M. M., Lavanya, B. L.,
Improving supply chain performance by
Nagariya, R., Singh Patel, B., & Chittipaka
Supplier Develop- ment program through
(2023). Intentions to adopt the blockchain: in-
enhanced visibility. Ma- terials Today:
vestigation of the retail supply chain. Manage-
Proceedings, 5(2), 3629-3638.
ment Decision, 61(5), 1320-1351.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2017.11.613. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-03-2022-0369.
[24] Kumar, C.V.S, Routroy, S., Mishra, R.K.
[33] Negash, Y.T., Kartika, J., Tseng, M.-L., Tan,
(2018). Lean Supplier Management for Better
K. (2020). A novel approach to measure
Cost Structures. Materials Today: Proceedings,
product quality in sustainable supplier
5, 18941–18945.
selection. Journal of Cleaner Production, 252,
2020, 119838.
[25] Kumar, M., Rodrigues, V.S. (2020). Synergetic
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119838.
effect of lean and green on innovation: A re-
[34] Nikoofal, M.E., Gümüs, M. (2020). Value of
source-based perspective. International Journal
audit for supply chains with hidden action and
of Production Economics, 219, 469–479.
information. European Journal of Operational
Research, 285, 902–915.
[26] Lettice, F., Wyatt, C., Evans, S. (2010).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2020.02.024.
Buyer– supplier partnerships during product
[35] O’ Connor, N., Lowry, P.B., Treiblmaier, H.
design and development in the global
(2020). Interorganizational cooperation and
automotive sector: Who invests, in what and
supplier performance inhigh-technology supply
when?. International Journal of Production
chains. Heliyon, 6(3), 1-16.
Economics, 127(2), 309- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon 2020.e03434.
319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2009.08.007.
[36] Praxmarer-Carus, S., Sucky, E., Durst, S.M.
[27] Li, S., & Chen, X. (2019). The role of supplier
(2013). The relationship between the perceived
collaboration and risk management capabilities
shares of costs and earnings in supplier devel-
in managing product complexity. Operations
opment programs and supplier satisfaction. In-
Management Research, 12(3), 146-158.
dustrial Marketing Management, 42(2), 202–
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12063-019-00144-w.
210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmar-
[28] Makinde, O., Selepe, R., Munyai, Th.,
man.2012.12.008.
Ramdass, K. (2020). Development of a
[37] Proch, M., Worthmann, K., Schlüchtermann, J.
supplier assessment form for an electronic
(2017). A negotiation-based algorithm to coor-
product manufacturing organization. Procedia
dinate supplier development in decentralized
Manufactur- ing, 43, 743–750.
supply chains. European Journal of Operational
Research, 256(1), 412–429.
[29] Medina Serrano, R., González-Ramírez, R., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2016.06.029.
Gascó, J. L., & Llopis, J. (2019). Sustainable [38] Purwanto, A., & Juliana, J. (2022). The effect
supplier evaluation practices across the supply of supplier performance and transformational
chain. Direccion y Organizacion, 69, 13-26. supply chain leadership style on supply chain
https://doi.org/10.37610/dyo.v0i69.558. performance in manufacturing companies.
[30] Min, H. (2022). Assessing the impact of a Uncer- tain Supply Chain Management,
COVID-19 pandemic on supply chain transfor- 10(2), 511-
mation: an exploratory analysis. Benchmarking: 516.
An International Journal, 30(6), 1765–1781. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.uscm.2021.12.001.
https://doi.org/10.1108/bij-04-2022-0260.
[39] Ratkiewicz, A., Walczak, J., (2022). Difficult-
to-measure integration measurement method
for designing processes in a chain-like 2.

structure of conflicted cells in a supply chain.
Archives of Transport, 64(4),
27-43.
https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0016.1047.
[40] Rumanti, A.A., Sunaryo, I., Wiratmadja, I.I., &
Irianto, D. (2021). Cleaner production through
open innovation in Indonesian batik small and
medium enterprises (SME). The TQM Journal,
33 (6), 1347-1372.
https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-04-2020-0086.
[41] Saghiri, S.S., Mirzabeiki, V. (2021). Buyer-led
environmental supplier development: Can sup-
pliers really help it?. International Journal of
Production Economics, 233, 107969.
[42] Salwin, M., Nehring, K., Jacyna-Gołda, I.,
Kra- slawski, A., (2022). Product-Service
System design – an example of the logistics
industry. Ar- chives of Transport,
63(3), 159-180.
https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0016.0820.
[43] Savic, M., Djordjevic, P., Milosevic, I., Mihaj-
lovic, I., & Zivkovic, Z. (2017). Assessment of
the ISO 9001 functioning on an example of re-
lations with suppliers development: empirical
study for transitional economy conditions.
Total Quality Management & Business
Excellence, 28(11-12), 1285-1306.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2015.113572
7.
[44] Schulte, J., Hallstedt, S.I. (2018). Self-Assess-
ment Method for Sustainability
Implementation in Product Innovation.
Sustainability, 10(12), 4336.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124336.
[45] Singh, S., Mohanty, R. P., Mangla, S. K., &
Agrawal, V. (2023). Critical success factors of
additive manufacturing for higher sustainable
competitive advantage in supply chains.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 425,
138908.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138908.
[46] Su, H. C., Kao, T. W. D., & Linderman, K.
(2020). Where in the supply chain network
does ISO 9001 improve firm productivity?.
Euro- pean Journal of Operational Research,
283(2), 530-540.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2019.11.042.
[47] Taber, K. S. (2017). The Use of Cronbach’s
Al- pha When Developing and Reporting
Research Instruments in Science Education.
Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273–
1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-
[48] Taifouris, M., Martín, M., Martínez, A., Es-
quejo, N. (2020). On the effect of the selection
of suppliers on the design of formulated prod-
ucts. Computers and Chemical Engineering,
141, 106980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comp-
chemeng.2020.106980.
[49] Talay, C., Oxborrow, L., Brindley, C. (2020).
How small suppliers deal with the buyer power
in asymmetric relationships within the sustaina-
ble fashion supply chain. Journal of Business
Research, 117, 604–614.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.08.034.
[50] Tomic, B., & Brkic, V. K. S. (2018). Customer
satisfaction and ISO 9001 improvement re-
quirements in the supply chain. The TQM Jour-
nal, 31(2), 222-238.
https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-07-2017-0072.
[51] Wang, X., Zhao, Y., Hou, L. (2020). How does
green innovation affect supplier C.-customer re-
lationships? A study on customer and relation-
ship contingencies, Industrial Marketing Man-
agement, 90, 170–180.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmar-
man.2020.07.008.
[52] Wang, Y., Modi, S.M., Schoenherr, T. (2021).
Leveraging sustainable design practices through
supplier involvement in new product
development: The role of the suppliers’ envi-
ronmental management capability. Interna-
tional Journal of Production Economics, 232,
107919.
[53] Wlazlak, P., Säfsten, K., Hilletofth, P., Johans-
son, G. (2018). Integration of suppliers’ work-
flows in the OEMs’ new product development
process. Procedia Manufacturing, 25, 479-486.
[54] Xu, L., Cui, N., Qualls, W., Zhang, L. (2017).
How socialization tactics affect supplier-buyer
co-development performance in exploratory and
exploitative projects: The mediating effects of
cooperation and collaboration. Journal of
Business Research, 78, 242–251.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.12.019.
[55] Xue, M., Fu, C., Feng, N. P., Lu, G. Y., Chang,
W. J., & Yang, S. L. (2018). Evaluation of sup-
plier performance of high-speed train based on
multi-stage multi-criteria decision-making
method. Knowledge-Based Systems, 162, 238-
251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kno-
[58] Zimon, D., Madzik, P., & Sroufe, R. (2020).
sys.2018.07.013.
The influence of ISO 9001 & ISO 14001 on
[56] Yazdani, M., Pamucar, D., Chatterjee, P., & sustainable supply chain management in the
Torkayesh, A. E. (2022). A multi-tier sustaina- textile industry. Sustainability, 12(10), 4282.
ble food supplier selection model under uncer- https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104282.
tainty. Operations Management Research, [59] Zivaljevic, A., Zakic, K., & Bevanda, V.
15(1), 116-145. (2022). What would QMS implementation re-
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12063-021-00186-z.
ally bring to a company?‐Theoretical review on
[57] Zimon, D., & Madzík, P. (2020). Standardized
benefits and disadvantages researched in prac-
management systems and risk management in
tice. Journal of Organizational Change
the supply chain. International Journal of Qual-
Manage- ment, 35(6), 805-845.
ity & Reliability Management. 37(2), 305-327.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-03-2020-0070.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-04-2019-0121.

Articulo 76

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Articulo 76

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Articulo 76

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ARCHIVES OF TRANSPORT ISSN (print): 0866-9546

Volume 68, Issue 4, 2023 e-ISSN (online): 2300-8830

EXPECTATIONS OF MANUFACTURING COMPANIES

Maciej URBANIAK1, Dominik ZIMON2, Peter MADZIK3

To cite this article:

Based on the above considerations, it can be con-

article focused on presenting the expectations of

records (formulas, drawings, test results of proto-

0 50 100 150 200

Table 2. Testing of reliability if item deleted

Fig. 2. Results of variables analysis

We also monitored the implemented management

Fig. 3.A. Example of testing differences by 2 Sample t-test

Fig. 3.B. Example of testing differences by 2 Sample t-test

Table 3. Differences of average values related to system (non)implementation

The correlation structure was examined to

Fig. 4. Correlation map of analyzed variables Table 4.

Results of factor analysis

Table 5. Rotated factor matrix

Four factors could be named based on the intensity

the environment) may occur. It can also be seen

ers. In addition, it can be stated that the

[5] Benton Jr., W.C., Prahinski, C., Fan, Y.

for designing processes in a chain-like 2.

You might also like