Thank you! That is the objective method of critiquing a paper. Too, honestly, any blind reviewer would probably ask some of the similar questions.
You are correct. However, this should be but one paper, looking at one area of interest. I would suspect the authors would be keenly interested in seeing a follow-up study in another area, with another sample.
As far as the local economy factors, they probably did not address it. However, using a random sample of businesses (random in both group) should minimize economy factors, as it would affect both groups the same.
I don't think anyone is interested in berating anybody here. The passionate exchange of ideas is what good discussions are made of. As long as we all remember it is about the ideas and not the idea maker, we're good.
It looks very detailed, shame it was only in 1 area of America and not a bit wider. I might have missed this but I would assume by just looking in one area they are not calculating any factors for local business success due to the success of the local economy itself?!?
You are correct. However, this should be but one paper, looking at one area of interest. I would suspect the authors would be keenly interested in seeing a follow-up study in another area, with another sample.
As far as the local economy factors, they probably did not address it. However, using a random sample of businesses (random in both group) should minimize economy factors, as it would affect both groups the same.
Good point. It may be worth looking into.One of the big statements for me was that it costs $97k to $560k to implement ISO9001... is that true? It seems extremely high compared to what I see as total costs in year 1 of ISO9001 in the UK.
To be honest though an abridged version of the report or soundbites, once it has been peer reviewed would be a good thing when people are trying to demonstrate the benefits of ISO9001 and it can only help the industry??
Everyone should we willing to review any of the documents for validity, to an extent. The authors are probably not going to turn over every single document to anybody. Not that there is something to hide. But some of it may be confidential (probably not in this case). Too, if it is a lot of data, they will probably use it for other purposes.Does the IAQG or any similar organisation have the ability to review such documents for validity?
I was only joking about berating you
I don't think anyone is interested in berating anybody here. The passionate exchange of ideas is what good discussions are made of. As long as we all remember it is about the ideas and not the idea maker, we're good.