Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Vol. 23 No. 2 (2023)
Inquietud Empresarial 23(2) Julio-Diciembre 2023

INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY

The Relation between Quality and Innovation in the Context of Agricultural Tractors Certification in Mexico

https://doi.org/10.19053/01211048.16228

Published 2023-11-09

  • David Arturo Reyes Chacón
    • ,
  • Gibrán Rivera González
    • ,
  • Alma Velia Ayala Garay
    • ,
  • Aydé Cadena López
    • ,
  • Luis Canek Ángeles Tovar

David Arturo Reyes Chacón
Dirección de Servicios Empresariales y Transferencia Tecnológica; Instituto Politécnico Nacional; Av. Wilfrido Massieu s/n, Edificio Adolfo Ruíz Cortines, Adolfo López Mateos, Gustavo A. Madero, 07738, Ciudad de México

Gibrán Rivera González
Unidad Profesional Interdisciplinaria de Ingeniería y Ciencias Sociales y Administrativas; Instituto Politécnico Nacional; Av. Té 950, Granjas México, Iztacalco, 08400, Ciudad de México

Alma Velia Ayala Garay
Campo Experimental Valle de México; Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias; Carretera Texcoco-Los Reyes km.13.5, Texcoco, Coatlinchán, 56250 Texcoco, Ciudad de México

Aydé Cadena López
Unidad Profesional Interdisciplinaria de Ingeniería y Ciencias Sociales y Administrativas; Instituto Politécnico Nacional; Av. Té 950, Granjas México, Iztacalco, 08400, Ciudad de México

Luis Canek Ángeles Tovar
Unidad Profesional Interdisciplinaria de Ingeniería y Ciencias Sociales y Administrativas; Instituto Politécnico Nacional; Av. Té 950, Granjas México, Iztacalco, 08400, Ciudad de México

Abstract

The goal of this paper is to analyze the relation between quality and innovation within the context of the certification of agricultural tractors in Mexico. To accomplish this goal, qualitative research with methodological triangulation was conducted through official documentation, semi-structured interviews, observation, and questionnaires conducted within manufacturing and distribution companies with internationally certified tractors. Through a relational model, we argue that quality indirectly contributes to innovation, due to the existence of an intermediate variable which shapes the relation between quality and innovation. This intermediate variable is integrated by components such as the ecosystem of Science, Technology and Innovation, organizational culture, marketing and brand value, exploitation of knowledge, human resources, R&D, as well as adaptability and R&D projects. A better performance of the variables of manufacturing enterprises over distribution companies allows us to show how the components of innovation boosting result in learning processes which in turn promote innovation. We conclude that the components of quality do not provide direct results in innovation, instead, they encourage and reinforce the intermediate components that drive it. We consider that the findings could be useful for other enterprises and industries.

 JEL Codes: O32, L15, Q1, Q13, Q16, L62

Received: 11/07/2023.  Accepted: 31/08/2023.  Published: 09/11/2023.

Keywords

quality, innovation, certification, agricultural industry, agricultural machinery

PDF (Español) XML (Español)

References

  1. Ayala, A., Almaguer, G., Larqué, B., Gutiérrez, J., & Ireta, A. (2018). Analysis of the certification process of the certification agency for agricultural implements and machinery (OCIMA) in Mexico. Textual, 72, 11-34. https://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/textual/n72/2395-9177-textual-72-11-en.pdf
  2. Barbieri, J. C. & Álvares, A. C. (2016). Sixth generation innovation model: description of a success model. RAI Revista de Administração e Inovação, 13(2), 116–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rai.2016.04.004
  3. Barbosa, J. W., Barbosa, J. C. y Rodríguez, M. (2013). Revisión y análisis documental para estado del arte: una propuesta metodológica desde el contexto de la sistematización de experiencias educativas. Investigación bibliotecológica, 27(61). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0187- 358X (13) 72555-3
  4. Benner, M. J. & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 238–256. https://doi.org/10.2307/30040711
  5. Bourke, J. & Roper, S. (2017). Innovation, quality management and learning: Short-term and longer-term effects. Research Policy, 46(8), 1505–1518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.07.005
  6. Brunet, I. y Baltar, F. (2010). Desarrollo endógeno, calidad institucional e innovación. Una revisión de la teoría y de algunos de sus límites. Revista Del CLAD Reforma y Democracia, (48), 115-148. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=357533680005
  7. Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. En Norman K. & Yvonna S. (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 509–535). Sage.
  8. Christensen, C. M., Johnson, M. W., & Rigby, D. K. (2002). Foundations for Growth: How to Identify and Build Disruptive New Businesses. MIT Sloan Management Review, 43. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/foundations-for-growth-how-to-identify-and-build-disruptive-new-businesses/
  9. Danglot, B, Vera-Perez, O., Yu, Z, Zaidman, A, Monperrus, M., & Baudry, B. (2019). A snowballing literature study on test amplification. Journal of Systems and Software, 157, 110398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2019.110398
  10. Del Río, O. (2011). El proceso de investigación: etapas y planificación de la investigación. En Vilches, L. (Coord.) La investigación en comunicación. Métodos y Técnicas en la era digital (pp. 67–93). Gedisa. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.2570.0166
  11. Dess, G. G. & Robinson, R. B. (1984). Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measures: The case of the privately held firm and conglomerate business unit. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 265-273. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250050306
  12. Douglas, T. J. & Judge Jr, W. Q. (2001). Total quality management implementation and competitive advantage: the role of structural control and exploration. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 158–169. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069343
  13. Enterprise Market Report (EMR) (2022). Análisis del Mercado de Maquinaria Agrícola en México. Informes de expertos. https://www.informesdeexpertos.com/informes/mercado-de-maquinaria-agricola-en-mexico
  14. Fajardo, M. (2012). Impacto de la gestión de calidad en la estructura organizativa y en la innovación de la industria azucarera colombiana. Estudios Gerenciales, 28, 317–338. http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0123-59232012000500017&lng=en&tlng=es
  15. Freeman, C. (1987). Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. Pinter Pub Ltd.
  16. Gadenne, D. & Sharma, B. (2009). An investigation of the hard and soft quality management factors of Australian SMEs and their association with firm performance. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 26(9):865-880. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656710910995064
  17. Gotzamani, K. D. & Tsiotras, G. D. (2002). The true motives behind ISO 9000 certification: Their effect on the overall certification benefits and long-term contribution towards TQM. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 19(2), 151-169. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656710210413499
  18. Hitt, M., Ireland, R. D., Hoskisson, R., Benjamín, E., & Fincowsky, F. (2008). Administración estratégica. Competitividad y globalización. Cengage Learning.
  19. Honarpour, A., Jusoh, A., & Nor, K. (2012). Knowledge Management, Total Quality Management, and Innovation: A New Look. Journal of technology management & innovation, 7(3), 22-31. https://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242012000300003
  20. Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI). (2019). Encuesta Nacional Agropecuaria 2019. INEGI. https://www.inegi.org.mx/programas/ena/2019/
  21. Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias (INIFAP). (2017). Lineamientos para la certificación y uso de marca de conformidad de productos certificados por el OCIMA-INIFAP. INIFAP. https://vdocuments.mx/reglamento-para-la-certificacion-y-uso-de-marca-de-lineamientos-para-la.html?page=1
  22. Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias (INIFAP). (2019). Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias ¿Qué hacemos?. INIFAP. https://www.gob.mx/inifap/que-hacemos
  23. International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2015). ISO/TC 176:2015 Sistemas de gestión de la calidad-Fundamentos y vocabulario. ISO. https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/es/#iso:std:iso:9000:ed-4:v1:es
  24. Juran, J. y Godfrey, A. B. (1999). Quality handbook. Republished. McGraw-Hill.
  25. Kaziliūnas, A. (2010). Impacts of different factors on the implementation of quality management systems and performance outcomes. Current Issues of Business and Law, 5(1), 75–92. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10088-010-0006-9
  26. Kleinknecht, A. & Bain, D. (1993). New concepts in innovation output measurement. St Martin’s Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-22892-8
  27. Liao, S. H., Chang, W. J., & Wu, C. C. (2010). Exploring TQM-innovation relationship in continuing education: A system architecture and propositions. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 21(11), 1121–1139. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2010.529330
  28. Lobo, G. J., Xie, Y., & Zhang, J. H. (2018). Innovation, financial reporting quality, and audit quality. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 51(3), 719–749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11156-017-0686-1
  29. Lundvall, B. Å. (2015). The origins of the national innovation system concept and its usefulness in the era of the globalizing economy. Eu-SPRI Annual Conference 2015, Helsinki, Finlandia. https://euspri-forum.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/lundvall-keynote-annual-conference-2015.pdf
  30. Malaver, M. N., Cardona, D. F. y Rivera, H. A. (2010). La implementación de las tecnologías de gestión de calidad y su relación con la innovación. Pensamiento & Gestión, (29), 104-123. http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S165762762010000200006&lng=en&tlng=es
  31. Morales, R. (3 de febrero de 2015). México, exitoso en venta de tractores. El Economista. https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/empresas/Mexico-exitoso-en-venta-de-tractores-20150202-0152.html
  32. Nakajima, S. & Shirase, K. (1992). Action Programmes of TPM for Production Innovation-Fabrication Industries. Japanese Institute of Plant Maintenance. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/162008446.pdf
  33. Naveh, E. & Erez, M. (2004). Innovation and attention to detail in the quality improvement paradigm. Management Science, 50(11), 1576–1586. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0272
  34. Organismo de Certificación de Implementos y Maquinaria Agrícola (OCIMA). (2015). Esquema específico de certificación de tractores agrícolas. Documento proporcionado por OCIMA.
  35. Organismo de Certificación de Implementos y Maquinaria Agrícola (OCIMA). (2018). Reporte de actividades del OCIMA 2018. Documento proporcionado por OCIMA. Documento proporcionado por OCIMA
  36. Organismo de Certificación de Implementos y Maquinaria Agrícola (OCIMA). (2021). XXIV. Reunión Ordinaria Comité Rector OCIMA. Documento proporcionado por OCIMA.
  37. Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura (FAO). (2020). FAO Stat. FAO. http://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#home
  38. Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económicos (OCDE). (2018). Oslo Manual 2018: guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data on innovation. OCDE, Eurostat. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/9789264304604-en.pdf?expires=1688064084&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=ABB0A1756B95939CBC3B97C9DBC2EDA9
  39. Palacio, F., Arévalo, P. y Guadalupe, J. (2017). Tipología de la innovación empresarial según Manual de Oslo. Revista Ciencia América, 6(1), 97-102. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/6163724.pdf
  40. Perdomo-Ortiz, J., González, J., & Galende, J. (2009). The intervening effect of business innovation capability on the relationship between Total Quality Management and technological innovation. International Journal of Production Research, 47(18), 5087–5107. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207540802070934
  41. Perdomo-Ortiz, J., González-Benito, J. & Galende, J. (2006). Total quality management as a forerunner of business innovation capability. Technovation, 26(10), 1170–1185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2005.09.008
  42. Peters, T. (2010). The circle of innovation: You can’t shrink your way to greatness. Alfred a Knopf Inc.
  43. Reyes-Chacón, D. A., Cadena A. y Rivera, G. (2022). El Sistema de Gestión de Calidad y su relación con la innovación. Interdisciplina, 10(26), 217-240. https://doi.org/10.22201/ceiich.24485705e.2021.25.80975
  44. Rothwell, R. & Zegveld, W. (1981). Industrial Innovation and Public Policy. Preparing for the 1980's and 1990's. Pinter Pub Ltd.
  45. Saloner, G., Shepard, A., & Podolny, J. (2005). Strategic Management in a Changing Environment. En Saloner, G., Shepard, A., y Podolny, J. (Eds.), Strategic Management, (pp. 271-304). John Wiley & Sons.
  46. Schumpeter, J. A. (1975). Historia del análisis económico. Ariel.
  47. Secretaría de Economía. (1 de julio de 2020). Ley de Infraestructura de la Calidad. [Nueva Ley DOF 01-07-2020]. https://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LICal_010720.pdf
  48. Tang, H. K. (1998). An inventory of organizational innovativeness. Technovation, 19(1), 41–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(98)00077-7
  49. Teece, D. J. (1989). Inter-organizational requirements of the innovation process. Managerial and Decision Economics, 10, 35–42. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2487209
  50. Terziovski, M. & Guerrero, J. L. (2014). ISO 9000 quality system certification and its impact on product and process innovation performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 158, 197-207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.08.011
  51. Terziovski, M., Samson, D., y Dow, D. (1997). The business value of quality management systems certification. Evidence from Australia and New Zealand. Journal of Operations Management, 15(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(96)00103-9
  52. Walker, D. & Florence, M. (2006). Grounded Theory: An Exploration of Process and Procedure. Qualitative Health Research, 16(4), 547–559. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305285972
  53. Wheelen, T. & Hunger, D. (2007). Administración Estratégica y Política de Negocios Conceptos y Casos. Pearson.
  54. Zehir, C., Gülen, Ö., Zehir, S., & Müceldilli, B. (2012). Total Quality Management Practices’ Effects on Quality Performance and Innovative Performance. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 41, 273–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.04.031
  55. Zeng, J., Zhang, W., Matsui, Y., & Zhao, X. (2017). The impact of organizational context on hard and soft quality management and innovation performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 185, 240–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.12.031

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

<< < 1 2 3 4 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.