Examining Obstacles to Quality Management Systems Implementation in Libyan Companies

This study delves into the challenges confronted by Libyan industrial companies during the implementation of Quality Management Systems (QMS), drawing comparisons with analogous cases in different countries. To achieve the outlined objectives, an extensive review of literature was conducted to comprehend the impediments associated with QMS implementation. Subsequently, a survey questionnaire was administered, collecting data from 32 industrial companies. The analysis was performed using SPSS, revealing that out of the 12 identified obstacles, six exhibited statistically significant differences in mean at the p=0.05 level. This indicates specific weaknesses encountered by Libyan companies, including a lack of tangible improvements from previous efforts, insufficient staff commitment, inadequate government support, incentives, and resources, misalignment with company vision/mission, limited financial resources, and a deficiency in technological facilities.


INTRODUCTION
Achieving success in the marketplace requires seamless collaboration within each facet of an organization, recognizing the interdependence of individuals and activities working towards shared goals.In the pursuit of heightened competitiveness, organizations seek elevated effectiveness across functions and processes, with Quality Management System (QMS) emerging as a strategic choice to sustain operations (Baidoun, 2003).QMS, conceived as a management philosophy, endeavors to enhance product, process, and service performance to meet and surpass customer expectations (Antony et al., 2002).It serves as a comprehensive framework, encompassing philosophy, methodology, and technique, guiding organizations in continuous improvement across all facets of their operations (Rad, 2005).This people-centric, measurement-driven, and customer-focused approach employs a structured and disciplined operating methodology.Numerous instances underscore the positive impact of well-executed QMS, manifesting in organizational improvements such as reduced defects, minimized rework and scrap, lower inventory levels, shortened lead times, enhanced flexibility, and heightened employee satisfaction (Salegna & Fazel, 2000).However, evaluations of QMS implementations reveal a spectrum of experiences, with some companies succeeding while others face challenges (Curry & Kadasah, 2002).Morris and Haigh's study (1996) suggests that 20% of organizations encounter no obstacles or overcome them successfully during QMS implementation, while 80% grapple with obstacles they fail to surmount.Recognizing and comprehending these obstacles is essential for achieving optimal operational performance through QMS programs (A'aqoulah et al., 2016;Tamimi & Sebastianelli, 1998).
Obstacles related to QMS emerge in diverse sectors, spanning industrial, services, government, and beyond.It is crucial for organizations to understand and actively tackle these challenges, both prior to and during the implementation of QMS (Masters, 1996).Without certain essential components, QMS is prone to failure or may yield minimal real benefits.Numerous researchers, drawing from their experiences, have identified distinct sets of obstacles (Bhat & Rajashekhar, 2009;Rad, 2005;Salegna & Fazel, 2000).Masters (1996), for instance, identified eight obstacles that frequently afflict organizations to varying degrees and frequencies.The challenges encompass a range of issues, such as a lack of commitment from management, resistance to changing organizational culture, inadequate implementation planning, insufficient ongoing training, organizational structure misalignment with isolated individuals and departments, ineffective measurement techniques, limited access to data and results, inadequate focus on internal and external customers, and suboptimal utilization of empowerment and teamwork.
A survey in the USA, conducted by the American Society for Quality (ASQ), revealed five obstacles: inadequate human resources development and management, lack of planning for quality, lack of leadership for quality, insufficient resources for QMS, and a dearth of customer focus (Sebastianelli & Tamimi, 2003).Another study in the USA examined obstacles faced by both QMS and non-QMS organizations.For QMS organizations, major obstacles included insufficient time, poor communication, and a lack of real employee empowerment.Non-QMS organizations faced challenges such as a lack of motivation, insufficient time, and a deficiency in strategic planning for change (Salegna & Fazel, 2000).
In Indonesia, 11 factors were identified as obstacles to successful QMS implementation, covering aspects related to human resources, management, attitude towards quality, organizational culture, interdepartmental relations, materials, machines and equipment, information, method, and training (Amar & Zain, 2002;Yang et al., 2023).A study in Turkey highlighted difficulties during QMS implementation, including a lack of employee involvement, awareness, and commitment, an inappropriate firm structure, and insufficient resources (Sadikoglu & Olcay, 2014).Two separate studies conducted in libya and in India found that three obstacles were identified in industrial companies: the absence of benchmarking other companies' practices, employee resistance to change, and a lack of resources (Bhat & Rajashekhar, 2009;Shibani et al., 2012).
Within Arabic-speaking countries, the adoption of Quality Management practices has been sluggish compared to other regions, with indications that QMS practices lack popularity among managers (Ghafar, 2023;Tannock & Ahmed, 2008).Tarbaghia and Betts's study (1996) on Libyan private and public companies highlights challenges in implementing effective managerial and management systems, with QMS obstacles emerging as significant obstacles.Another study conducted in Libya by Albishti (2022) reveals that the primary hindrances to implementing change include challenges with suppliers, logistics and organizational culture.A study carried out in Yemen outlined three primary categories of obstacles related to QMS.The first category focused on government-related issues, such as the selection of managers in public organizations and the absence of governmental programs supporting quality activities.The second category centered around a lack of knowledge of new techniques and a shortage of skilled personnel.The third and most significant category emphasized cultural obstacles and inappropriate managerial traditions (Al-Zamany et al., 2002;Albishti, 2022).In Qatar, several obstacles were identified, including a rigid hierarchical and authoritative structure, a lack of top management commitment and support, employee resistance, resistance from middle management, a negative work climate, insufficient knowledge and skills of top management, resource constraints for implementing changes, improper personnel placements, nationality-based promotions, and challenges associated with empowerment at lower employee levels (Al-Khalifa & Aspinwall, 2000).Summarizing the diverse yet analogous findings from the aforementioned studies, common themes include a lack of various resources observed in Yemen, the USA, Indonesia, India, and Qatar.Additionally, a lack of involvement from both management and employees emerged as a common obstacle in the USA, Qatar, and Indonesia, while a lack of management commitment was evident in Yemen, the USA, Indonesia, and India.
The knowledge acquired through this study carries significant implications for the Libyan government, specifically impacting the National Oil Corporation (NOC) and the Ministry of Economy and Industry in shaping policy decisions.Moreover, these discoveries will act as a valuable reference for organizations considering QMS implementation, assisting Libyan industrial managers in evaluating their existing QMS efforts through self-audits.This, in turn, will help them develop successful strategic plans and action programs to overcome challenges.

LIBYAN INDUSTRIAL COMPANIES
Similar to industrial entities in many other developing nations, Libyan industrial companies are predominantly owned, managed, and overseen by government institutions.These companies are typically categorized into oil and non-oil sectors.The National Oil Corporation (NOC) serves as the representative of the oil-sector industry, possessing fullyowned companies engaged in exploration, development, production operations, and both local and international marketing.The NOC also forms participation agreements with specialized international companies, evolving into exploration and production sharing agreements in alignment with the global oil and gas industry's development.Additionally, NOC owns and operates refineries such as Zawia and Ras Lanuf, as well as ammonia, urea, and methanol facilities, the Ras Lanuf petrochemical complex, gas processing plants, ethylene, and polyethylene plants.The Ministry of Industry Economy and Trade oversees non-oil sector industries, including iron and steel, cement and construction materials, basic metals, chemicals, textiles, plastics, wood, food, engineering, and electrical power industries.

METHODOLOGY
To pinpoint obstacles to QMS within Libyan industrial companies, a thorough examination of existing literature was undertaken to comprehend the diverse hindrances impacting the implementation of QMS.Following this, a survey questionnaire was distributed among 32 Libyan industrial companies.The questionnaire was divided into two main sections.Part A included general inquiries exploring the characteristics of the surveyed companies and details about the respondents, with yes/no options for answers.Part B delved into potential QMS obstacles, prompting respondents to evaluate the extent to which each of the 12 quality conditions listed in Table 1 currently posed obstacle to implementing quality activities in their respective companies.All questions were presented in a five-point Likert scale format (1, not applicable; 2, very low extent; 3, low extent; 4, moderate; 5, high extent).

Q12
Inadequacy in technology facilities.
A skilled English-Arabic translator translated the questionnaire components into Arabic.The Arabic version was later rendered back into English and meticulously examined for consistency.A sum of 311 questionnaire copies was circulated to participants holding diverse management roles within selected organizations.Each questionnaire was paired with a formal letter elucidating the research's objectives and furnishing contact details for any queries or clarifications.Among the 311 distributed copies, 238 were received, and following a screening process, 226 copies were considered suitable for data analysis.This yielded a response rate of 76.5%, as outlined in Table 2.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Information gathered from a variety of industrial sectors underwent careful examination to ensure the comprehensive addressing of all questions.Subsequently, the data underwent processing, screening, and analysis using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) software.Table 3 delineates the sizes of companies included in the study.Large companies were characterized as those with more than 500 employees (F1 -oil and gas, F2 -cement, F3steel, F5 -electric and power industry), while medium-sized companies had employees ranging from 100 to 500 (F4 -agro-food, F6 -textile and plastic, F7 -wood industry).To evaluate the inter-correlations among obstacles, a factor analysis was conducted, revealing a Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy at 0.87.The KMO statistic, ranging from 0 to 1, signifies that a value approaching one suggests that factor analysis is likely to yield distinct and reliable factors (Bhat & Rajashekhar, 2009).A summary of the varimax rotated matrix is presented in Table 4, identifying three factors that collectively explained about 61% of the total variation.Items with loadings below 0.5 were excluded, while those with higher loadings were deemed significant and influential in attributing labels to the factors (Kakkar & Narag, 2007).Specifically, questions Q1-4 were grouped under factor 2, termed as "lack of total involvement."Questions Q5-6, Q10, and Q12 were assigned to factor 3, labeled as "lack of resources," while questions Q7-9 and Q11 were associated with factor 1, designated as "lack of effective management".These results align with the outcomes of prior studies, revealing lack of resources in Yemen, the USA, Indonesia, India, and Qatar (Albishti, 2022;Amar & Zain, 2002;Bhat & Rajashekhar, 2009;Sebastianelli & Tamimi, 2003;Yang et al., 2023).Similarly, an insufficient level of overall involvement was identified in the USA, Qatar, Singapore, and Indonesia (Al-Khalifa & Aspinwall, 2000;Amar & Zain, 2002;Sebastianelli & Tamimi, 2002;Yang et al., 2023).In addition, a deficiency in management commitment was observed in Indonesia, India, the USA, and Yemen (Al-Zamany et al., 2002;Albishti, 2022;Bhat & Rajashekhar, 2009;Sebastianelli & Tamimi, 2003;Yang et al., 2023)..7650Q 3 .7280 Q 4 .6570 Q 5 .6360 Q 6 .5800 Q 7 .7860 Q 8 .7840 Q 9 .6990 Q 10 .7870 Q 11 .5910 Q 12 .5280 Reliability testing was carried out for individual elements and the entire questionnaire, demonstrating Cronbach's alpha values surpassing 0.8, as outlined in Table 5.A Cronbach's alpha (α) equal to or exceeding 0.6 is widely acknowledged as acceptable (AlOqlah, 2021), affirming the questionnaire's reliability.
At a significance level of p=0.05, the obstacles identified include: Q1, indicating a lack of tangible improvements in past efforts; Q3, signifying a lack of commitment from staff; Q5, highlighting a deficiency in government support, incentives, and resources; Q6, expressing a deviation from our company vision/mission; Q10, pointing to a shortage of financial resources; and Q12, underscoring a deficiency in technology facilities.Meanwhile, both Q2 and Q4 provide weak indications of impeding Quality Management System (QMS) implementation.Conversely, Q7, Q8, Q9, and Q11 show weak or no evidence of obstructing QMS implementation.To delve deeper into the significant differences in mean among major business area groups, a Post Hoc Least Significance Difference (LSD) test was conducted for these six obstacles.The LSD test brought to light that one large-sized industry (F5; Electric and power supply industry) and two medium-sized industries (F6; textile industry and F7; plastic and wood industry) faced specific vulnerabilities in comparison to other industrial companies in Libya.The Electric and Power supply industry grappled with two obstacles, lack of total involvement (Factor 2) and lack of resources (Factor 3), while the plastic and wood industry, as well as the textile industry, encountered a deficiency in resources (Factor 3).

CONCLUSION
In this study, three factors were identified: lack of total involvement, lack of resources, and lack of effective management.The overall findings suggest that Libyan industrial companies generally grapple with two primary obstacles, specifically the lack of total involvement and the lack of resources.These factors align with similar challenges observed in other regions such as Yemen, Indonesia, USA, India, and Qatar.Notably, Singapore did not report a lack of resources.Within Libya, the Electric and Power supply industry, Textile, and Plastic industry emerged as facing notable challenges, displaying distinct weaknesses compared to other industrial companies.The and Power supply industry encountered two obstacles, lack of total involvement and lack of resources, while the Plastic and Wood industry and Textile industry specifically dealt with a lack of resources.

Table 1 :
QMS obstacles list

Table 3 :
Company size

Table 5 :
Reliability and ANOVA Tests