Standards as catalyst for national innovation and performance – a capability assessment framework for latecomer countries

Figures & data

Figure 1. Outline of the research method.

Table 1. Defining the key components of national standards system and a comparison to prior studies.

Description of system	Components of national standards infrastructure	Source: Authors (Year)
▸ This study: national standards system	• SCaM	This study
National/national quality infrastructure or system	• Standardisation, metrology, testing, certification, and accreditation	Sanetra and Marbán (2007)
	• Metrology, standards, testing, and quality (MSTQ)	Frota et al. (2010)
	• Standardisation, certification, testing, inspection, calibration, and accreditation; Metrology	Guasch et al. (2007)
	• SCaM	ISO, UNIDO (2009)
National/national standards infrastructure	• Scientific level (measurement science)	Park, Bahng, and Choi (2010)
	• Procedure level (conformity assessment procedures)
	• Industry level (standards and technical regulations)
SMTQ infrastructure	• SMTQ	UNIDO (2010) and UNIDO (2003)
SQAM services	• SQAM	Dinu (2008) and DTI/DFID (2003)

Figure 2. SCaM: The three key pillars of a national standards system.

ScaM – related system and their activities constitute the national standards system of a country interdependently.

Table 2. Seven assessment categories of the NACAF.

Model (sources)	Criteria	Comparison
▸ This study NSCAF	▸ This study	Based on TQM model, focus group interviews (national standards system)
	Laws, systems, and institutions
	Strategies and implementation plan, and Stakeholders
	Infrastructure, Human resources, Process and Outcome
TQM: Baldrige Criteria in the USA (NIST, 2011)	Leadership, Strategic planning, and Customer focus	TQM models used in various sectors/countries (for measuring and improving organisational performance)
	Measurement, analysis, and knowledge management
	Workforce focus, Operation focus, and Results
TQM: EFQM Criteria in Europe (Rusjan, 2005)	Leadership, Strategy, People, Partnerships and resources, Processes, products, and services, Customer results, People results, Society results, and Key results
National ICT Standards System Evaluation (ITU, 2009)	Standards development capacity	Developed by an experts group (ICT sector standards system)
	Human resources
	Policy and Standards use and adoption
ISO Institutional (INS) project (ISO, 2010)	National policy and laws, Scope of National Standards Body (NSB), NSB problems and challenges, and NSB operating environment	Developed by an experts group (institutional aspects)
	Other technical assistance activities and other factors

Note: The seven criteria of NSCAF were developed based on TQM criteria such as Baldrige or ETQM, which are more comprehensive than existing components developed by ISO and ITU. NSB, national standards body.

Table 3. Seven assessment categories of the NSCAF.

Seven categories	Definitions
Laws, systems, and institutions	• The nation should prepare laws and systems related to standards, establish related institutions, and secure budgets for standards and related laws and systems for each pillar, Institutions to implement related laws and systems, their size, and budgets
Strategies and implementation plans	• The nation should establish and implement strategies and implementation plans for developing national standards. This effort means responding to changes in domestic and overseas standards environments to align standards strategies with national development strategies, establish strategies for developing national standards, align standards strategies with national development strategies, and draw up implementation plans for a standards strategy
Stakeholders	• The nation should clearly identify the stakeholders of national standards and their needs and then reflect these needs in standards: Define stakeholders, identify and analyse stakeholders, reflect their needs, and arrange for feedback
Infrastructure	• The nation should secure the infrastructure, including facilities, equipment, and information technology for national standards activity and provide access to the infrastructure for all stakeholders: Secure necessary facilities, equipment, and information technology; provide easy access to necessary facilities, equipment, and an IT system as well as their usage; and address human resources
Human resources	• The nation should secure and manage human resources for national standards and create and operate mid- to long-term programmes for nurturing human resources: Nurture human resources (training, qualifications, and criteria), a human resources management system, and the competency of human resources (scale and level)
Process	• The nation should establish and implement processes for effective and efficient operation of a standards system: Process for establishing an operations plan, processes for operation, and processes for assessment and improvement
Outcome	• The nation should develop outcome indicators, set objectives, and manage them. Have measurable outcome indicators for the other six categories

Note: The detailed definitions of the seven assessment criteria of NSCAF are provided.

Figure 3. Concepts of the NSCAF.

The NSCAF is a combination of three SCaM pillars and seven assessment criteria.

Table 4. Scoring for NSCAF.

Pillars	Total		I. Standardisation		II. Conformityassessment		III. Metrology
Category	Score	%	Score	%	Score	%	Score	%
Laws, systems, and institution	150	15.0	70	17.5	50	16.7	30	10.0%
Strategies, implementation, and plans	110	11.0	50	12.5	30	10.0	30	10.0
Stakeholders	90	9.0	40	10.0	20	6.7	30	10.0
Infrastructure	155	15.5	45	11.3	50	16.7	60	20.0
Human resources	180	18.0	70	17.5	50	16.7	60	20.0
Process	115	11.5	45	11.3	40	13.3	30	10.0
Outcome	200	20.0	80	20.0	60	20.0	60	20.0
Total	1000	100.0	400	100.0	300	100.0	300	100.0

Figure 4. Five stages of countries using NSCAF.

Table 5. Profile of four participating countries involved in pilot implementation.^a

Class	GDP (nominal)	Population	GDP per capita (nominal)	Export of goods	Pilot implementationperiod (Year/Month)
Countries^b	(Billion US$)	(Million)	(US$)	(Billion US$)	Self-assessment	Main assessment
A country	13 B	15 M	900	5 B	2011/08–10	2011/11
B country	67 B	15 M	4569	22 B	2012/07–09	2012/10
C country	124 B	92 M	1411	96 B	2012/01–03	2012/04
D country	1116 B	49 M	22,424	557 B	2012/01–02	2012/03

^aThe original data for GDP nominal (http://data.worldbank.org, accessed on 3 November 2012), population, and export of goods (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html were obtained on 5 November 2012.

^bBy agreement with the governments of the four countries studied, the country name is not disclosed in this paper.

Figure 5. Pilot implementation results based on three SCaM pillars.

The ranking of overall scores of the four countries do not always match the ranking of each pillar.

Figure 6. Pilot implementation results using the seven categories. (a) Overall SCaM capability. (b) Standardisation capability. (c) Assessment of conformity capability. (d) Metrology capability.

Sanetra, C., & Marbán, R.M. (2007). The answer to the global quality challenge: A national quality infrastructure. Braunschweig: PTB, OEA and SIM.

 Google Scholar

Frota, M., Racine, J., Blanc, F., Rodrigues, P., Ibragimov, S., Torkhov, D., & Osavolyuk, S. (2010). Assessment of the Ukrainian quality infrastructure: Challenges imposed by the WTO and commitments to EU accession. Key Engineering Materials, 437, 611–615.

 Google Scholar

Guasch, J.L., Racine, J.-L., Sánchez, I., & Diop, M. (2007). Quality systems and standards for a competitive edge (Directions in Development). Washington, DC: World Bank Publications.

 Google Scholar

ISO, UNIDO. (2009). The Conformity Assessment Toolbox. Geneva: Author.

 Google Scholar

Park, J., Bahng, G.W., & Choi, J.O. (2010). The role of metrology communities under the WTO system: Measurement science and conformity assessment procedures. Accreditation and Quality Assurance: Journal for Quality, Comparability and Reliability in Chemical Measurement, 15, 445–450.

 Google Scholar

UNIDO. (2010). UNIDO activities in the area of standards, metrology, testing and quality (SMTQ). Vienna: Author.

 Google Scholar

UNIDO. (2003). Trade capacity building: Supply-side development, conformity and integration in the global market (UNIDO position paper). Industrial Development Forum and Associated Round Tables, UNIDO, Vienna, pp. 151–180.

 Google Scholar

Dinu, V. (2008). Policies concerning SQAM services development in Romania. Amfiteatru Economic, 9, 33–39.

 Google Scholar

DTI/DFID. (2003). Interdepartmental workshop on capacity building in standards, quality, accreditation and metrology (SQAM) sector. London: Department of Trade and Industry & Department for International Development.

 Google Scholar

NIST. (2011). The 2011–2012 criteria for performance excellence. Gaithersburg, MD: Author.

 Google Scholar

Rusjan, F.o.E.B. (2005). Usefulness of the EFQM excellence model: Theoretical explanation of some conceptual and methodological issues. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 16, 363–380.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

ITU. (2009). Bridging the standardization gap. ITU-T research project: Measuring and reducing the standards gap. Geneva: ITU.

 Google Scholar

ISO. (2010). ISO action plan for developing countries 2011–2015. Geneva: ISO Central Secretariat.

 Google Scholar