Thus, for this research study, a quantitative approach was used. Because the quantitative research approach was relevant and helped analyse the current status of EMS implementation and understand the various key drivers and challenges for successful EMS implementation in the manufacturing industries in Abu Dhabi, UAE, a descriptive research design was used. As the study involved hypothesis formulation after secondary data collection, a questionnaire survey was the main methodology employed in this research. The questionnaire contained 80 different closed-ended questions based on a 4-point Likert scale.
Further, the questionnaire was divided into six parts that comprised demographic profile, the effectiveness of EMS implementation in the manufacturing sector, benefits of EMS implementation, drivers of EMS implementation, challenges faced by the organization in the
EMS implementation and improvements required in the EMS implementation. Once the questionnaire was developed, a pilot test was conducted involving 30 participants to ensure the validity and reliability of the survey questionnaire. Then the actual questionnaire survey was conducted and the responses were obtained from 475 employees from 110 manufacturing companies. Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (SPSS) was used for the data analysis. A reliability test was conducted within SPSS and the value of Cronbach’s alpha was measured to ensure the internal consistency of the measuring instrument. Further, SPSS was useful in carrying out descriptive statistics and hypothesis testing. Statistical testing such as the Chi-square test was conducted to analyse the collected data and calculated the Chi-square & p-value to make a further decision on accepting or rejecting the null hypothesis.
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
4.1 Demographic Profile Result
The current study examined the demographic profile and observed that 90.7% are male, 46.9% comes between 31 to 40 age group, 57.7% are bachelor's degrees, and 40.6%
have middle management workers. Table 4.1 shows the demographic profile results.
Table 4.1: Demographic profile results
Items Frequency of
Respondents
Percentage
Total No. of Respondents 475 100
Gender Male 431 90.7
Female 44 9.3
Age 21 – 30 148 31.2
31 – 40 223 46.9
41 – 50 80 16.8
51 & above 24 5.1
Educational Qualification
Higher Secondary 24 5.1
Diploma 85 17.9
Bachelor 274 57.7
Post-Graduation /
Master 89 18.7
PhD 3 0.6
Designation of the Employee
Senior Management 36 7.6
Middle Management 193 40.6
Supervisor 170 35.8
Technician/worker 76 16.0
4.2 Evaluation of the EMS Implementation
The study examined the current status of the EMS implementation in the manufacturing industries in the emirate of Abu Dhabi. Table 4.2 shows the results.
Table 4.2: Evaluation of EMS implementation
Statements Attributes Frequency Percentage
1. My Organisation has an environmental management system in place
Strongly Agree 318 66.9
Agree 133 28
Disagree 16 3.4
Strongly Disagree 8 1.7
2. My company’s EMS is certified to the ISO 14001
Strongly Agree 321 67.6
Agree 67 14.1
Disagree 55 11.6
Strongly Disagree 32 6.7 3. There is an Environment, Health and
Safety (HSE) or Environmental department at the facility.
Strongly Agree 307 64.6
Agree 118 24.8
Disagree 40 8.4
Strongly Disagree 10 2.1 4. Top management is taking
accountability for the EMS implementation.
Strongly Agree 263 55.4
Agree 159 33.5
Disagree 51 10.7
Strongly Disagree 2 0.4
5. Top management is effectively implementing the environmental policy
Strongly Agree 246 51.8
Agree 152 32
Disagree 70 14.7
Strongly Disagree 7 1.5
6. My employer is serious on EMS performance reporting.
Strongly Agree 206 43.4
Agree 184 38.7
Disagree 77 16.2
Strongly Disagree 8 1.7
7. My employer is determining the environmental aspects
Strongly Agree 203 42.7
Agree 207 43.6
Disagree 53 11.2
Strongly Disagree 12 2.5 8. My company is maintaining compliance
to the legal requirements
Strongly Agree 269 56.6
Agree 189 39.8
Disagree 17 3.6
Strongly Disagree - -
Table 4.2 continued 9. My company has established targets and
objectives for all the significant environmental aspects.
Strongly Agree 207 43.6
Agree 209 44
Disagree 49 10.3
Strongly Disagree 10 2.1 10. My employer is providing the
resources needed for the continual improvement of the EMS.
Strongly Agree 201 42.3
Agree 194 40.8
Disagree 73 15.4
Strongly Disagree 7 1.5
11. My employer is not taking action to acquire the necessary competence for the implementation of EMS.
Strongly Agree 37 7.8
Agree 122 25.7
Disagree 148 31.2
Strongly Disagree 168 35.4 12. All employees are not aware of the
implementation of EMS.
Strongly Agree 31 6.5
Agree 188 39.6
Disagree 148 31.2
Strongly Disagree 108 22.7 13. I am not fully aware of the company’s
environmental policy.
Strongly Agree 76 16.0
Agree 103 21.7
Disagree 130 27.4
Strongly Disagree 166 34.9 14. I am aware of the significant
environmental aspects arising out of my activities.
Strongly Agree 255 53.7
Agree 189 39.8
Disagree 23 4.8
Strongly Disagree 8 1.7
15. I am confused with my roles and responsibility in the implementation of EMS.
Strongly Agree 39 8.2
Agree 82 17.3
Disagree 144 30.3
Strongly Disagree 210 44.2 16. I am not sure about the availability of
the EMS documents in my organisation.
Strongly Agree 26 5.5
Agree 91 19.2
Disagree 174 36.6
Strongly Disagree 184 38.7 17. I do not know about the operational
control procedures for managing significant environmental aspects.
Strongly Agree 46 9.7
Agree 100 21.1
Disagree 159 33.5
Strongly Disagree 170 35.8
Table 4.2 continued 18. I am able to follow the emergency
response plan in case of any potential emergency.
Strongly Agree 293 61.7
Agree 140 29.5
Disagree 32 6.7
Strongly Disagree 10 2.1 19. My employer is regularly monitoring
and measuring environmental performance.
Strongly Agree 214 45.1
Agree 186 39.2
Disagree 71 14.9
Strongly Disagree 4 0.8
20. Non-compliance issues are identified in the EMS implementation.
Strongly Agree 151 31.8
Agree 229 48.2
Disagree 74 15.6
Strongly Disagree 21 4.4 21. My employer is conducting the internal
audit at regular intervals at least once a year.
Strongly Agree 232 48.8
Agree 174 36.6
Disagree 55 11.6
Strongly Disagree 14 2.9 22. Top management is conducting the
review meeting at least once a year to ensure the effectiveness of the EMS implementation.
Strongly Agree 213 44.8
Agree 169 35.6
Disagree 73 15.4
Strongly Disagree 20 4.2 23. My employer is committed to the
continual improvement of EMS to enhance environmental performance.
Strongly Agree 221 46.5
Agree 175 36.8
Disagree 63 13.3
Strongly Disagree 16 3.4 24. My company is not taking necessary
corrective and preventive actions to rectify the non-conformances.
Strongly Agree 42 8.8
Agree 80 16.8
Disagree 168 35.4
Strongly Disagree 185 38.9 25. EMS is implemented strictly in my
company.
Strongly Agree 153 32.2
Agree 225 47.4
Disagree 79 16.6
Strongly Disagree 18 3.8 26. All employees are involved in the
implementation of EMS.
Strongly Agree 136 28.6
Agree 197 41.5
Disagree 115 24.2
Strongly Disagree 27 5.7
4.3 Results of Employee’s Perception on EMS Implementation
The study observed the perception of the employees on the EMS implementation in the manufacturing industries in the emirate of Abu Dhabi. Table 4.3 displays the results.
Table 4.3: Employee’s perception on EMS implementation
Statements Attributes Frequency Percentage
1. Implementation of EMS cause extra workload to my regular activities.
Strongly Agree 31 6.5
Agree 162 34.1
Disagree 192 40.4
Strongly Disagree 90 18.9 2. Environment management system
increased customer satisfaction.
Strongly Agree 232 48.8
Agree 206 43.4
Disagree 31 6.5
Strongly Disagree 6 1.3
3. Implementation of EMS protects the environment by controlling the pollution arising out of the company activities.
Strongly Agree 291 61.3
Agree 157 33.1
Disagree 21 4.4
Strongly Disagree 6 1.3
4. Corporate image is enhanced with the implementation of EMS in my company.
Strongly Agree 213 44.8
Agree 224 47.2
Disagree 32 6.7
Strongly Disagree 6 1.3
5. EMS increased the productivity and market share of our company.
Strongly Agree 162 34.1
Agree 237 49.4
Disagree 71 14.9
Strongly Disagree 5 1.1
6. EMS increased team effort and team spirit.
Strongly Agree 184 38.7
Agree 237 49.9
Disagree 48 10.1
Strongly Disagree 6 1.3
7. EMS lowers environment-related costs and fees.
Strongly Agree 157 33.1
Agree 231 48.6
Disagree 79 16.6
Strongly Disagree 8 1.7
8. EMS increases the profit margin of the company.
Strongly Agree 138 29.1
Agree 224 47.2
Disagree 107 22.5
Strongly Disagree 6 1.3
Table 4.3 continued 9. EMS increases the company’s access to
new customers.
Strongly Agree 175 36.8
Agree 232 48.8
Disagree 62 13.1
Strongly Disagree 6 1.3
10. EMS enables direct savings through reductions in resource usages.
Strongly Agree 144 30.3
Agree 270 56.8
Disagree 58 12.2
Strongly Disagree 3 0.6
11. Implementation of EMS is necessary for manufacturing industries.
Strongly Agree 270 56.8
Agree 184 38.7
Disagree 19 4.0
Strongly Disagree 2 0.4
12. The implementation of ISO 14001 will affect my employment in a positive way.
Strongly Agree 229 48.2
Agree 171 36.0
Disagree 42 8.8
Strongly Disagree 33 6.9 13. EMS improves the operational safety
of the organization.
Strongly Agree 284 59.8
Agree 170 35.8
Disagree 15 3.2
Strongly Disagree 6 1.3
14. EMS provides economic advantages for the organization in the local market.
Strongly Agree 203 42.7
Agree 228 48.0
Disagree 34 7.2
Strongly Disagree 10 2.1
4.4 Results of Key Drivers for EMS Implementation
The study investigated the key drivers useful for EMS implementation in the manufacturing industries in the emirate of Abu Dhabi. Table 4.4 reflects the results.
Table 4.4: Results of Key Drivers for EMS implementation
Statements Attributes Frequency Percentage
1. Top management commitment towards an eco-friendly environment influences the company to implement EMS effectively.
Strongly Agree 239 50.3
Agree 203 42.7
Disagree 28 5.9
Strongly Disagree 5 1.1
Table 4.4 continued 2. Customers influence on EMS
certification such as ISO 14001.
Strongly Agree 206 43.4
Agree 211 44.4
Disagree 51 10.7
Strongly Disagree 7 1.5
3. Degree of competition influences the company to implement EMS to have a competitive edge.
Strongly Agree 163 34.3
Agree 246 51.8
Disagree 66 13.9
Strongly Disagree - -
4. Pressure from the community, including non-governmental organizations, environmental groups, neighbourhood organizations and the media.
Strongly Agree 135 28.4
Agree 206 43.4
Disagree 101 21.3
Strongly Disagree 33 6.9 5. We implement the EMS to enhance the
corporate image.
Strongly Agree 160 33.7
Agree 229 48.2
Disagree 76 16.0
Strongly Disagree 10 2.1 6. EMS encourages our company to adopt
voluntary compliance with local government regulations, industry standards and International Standards.
Strongly Agree 152 32.0
Agree 274 57.7
Disagree 43 9.1
Strongly Disagree 6 1.3
7. Lowering costs and risks, are among the economic drivers for EMS adoption and certification.
Strongly Agree 129 27.2
Agree 298 62.7
Disagree 45 9.5
Strongly Disagree 3 0.6
8. The needs to increase process efficiency is one of the economic drivers for EMS adoption and certification.
Strongly Agree 124 26.1
Agree 287 60.4
Disagree 55 11.6
Strongly Disagree 9 1.9
9. The legal requirements are the main reason for the company to implement environmental initiatives.
Strongly Agree 169 35.6
Agree 189 39.8
Disagree 104 21.9
Strongly Disagree 13 2.7 10. EMS assists in avoiding legal
violations/fines/penalties.
Strongly Agree 215 45.3
Agree 171 36.0
Disagree 77 16.2
Strongly Disagree 12 2.5 11. The characteristics of the product make
it necessary to implement EMS.
Strongly Agree 170 35.8
Agree 234 49.3
Disagree 59 12.4
Strongly Disagree 12 2.5
4.5 Results on Challenges to Implement EMS
The study examined the challenges associated with the implementation of EMS in the manufacturing industries in the emirate of Abu Dhabi. Table 4.5 depicts the results on the challenges to implement EMS.
Table 4.5: Results on challenges to implement EMS
Statements Attributes Frequency Percentage
1. I have adapted to the EMS way of doing my activities.
Strongly Agree 180 37.9
Agree 240 50.5
Disagree 46 9.7
Strongly Disagree 9 1.9
2. I am having a stressful work environment ever since EMS has been implemented.
Strongly Agree 72 15.2
Agree 127 26.7
Disagree 155 32.6
Strongly Disagree 121 25.5 3. I do not want to implement EMS as I
have fear of the unknown.
Strongly Agree 25 5.3
Agree 65 13.7
Disagree 188 39.6
Strongly Disagree 197 41.5 4. I do not like changes while
implementing the EMS.
Strongly Agree 39 8.2
Agree 79 16.6
Disagree 198 41.7
Strongly Disagree 159 33.5 5. My company spent a lot of money in
implementing the EMS.
Strongly Agree 36 7.6
Agree 192 40.4
Disagree 186 39.2
Strongly Disagree 61 12.8 6. We do not have the technology to reduce
pollution.
Strongly Agree 28 5.9
Agree 117 24.6
Disagree 208 43.8
Strongly Disagree 122 25.7 7. I am familiar with how EMS works in
my company.
Strongly Agree 136 28.6
Agree 241 50.7
Disagree 81 17.1
Strongly Disagree 17 3.6
Table 4.5 continued 8. I am not worried about the EMS,
because there is no enforcement.
Strongly Agree 51 10.7
Agree 117 24.6
Disagree 181 38.1
Strongly Disagree 123 25.9 9. We have competent persons to
implement and maintain the EMS certification.
Strongly Agree 177 37.3
Agree 219 46.1
Disagree 66 13.9
Strongly Disagree 13 2.7 10. I have been provided clear instructions
on how to protect the environment.
Strongly Agree 186 39.2
Agree 224 47.2
Disagree 56 11.8
Strongly Disagree 9 1.9
11. I have been given the opportunity to acquire the relevant knowledge on EMS by means of training.
Strongly Agree 113 23.8
Agree 262 55.2
Disagree 73 15.4
Strongly Disagree 27 5.7 12. I need more training on the EMS. Strongly Agree 182 38.3
Agree 243 51.2
Disagree 46 9.7
Strongly Disagree 4 0.8
13. The Environment Agency in Abu Dhabi is strict in enforcing environmental laws.
Strongly Agree 220 46.3
Agree 159 33.5
Disagree 77 16.2
Strongly Disagree 19 4.0
4.6 Results on Improvements Required for EMS Implementation
The study examined further improvements required for the effective implementation of EMS in the manufacturing industries in the emirate of Abu Dhabi and the results are highlighted in Table 4.6.
Table 4.6: Results of improvements for EMS implementation
Statements Attributes Frequency Percentage
1.EMS training and other relevant programs can improve EMS performance.
Strongly Agree 333 70.1
Agree 131 27.6
Disagree 11 2.3
Strongly Disagree - -
Table 4.6 continued 2. By doing regular internal audit can
improve the EMS performance.
Strongly Agree 317 66.7
Agree 154 32.4
Disagree 4 0.8
Strongly Disagree - -
3. Financial incentives can motivate employees for better involvement in the EMS implementation.
Strongly Agree 254 53.5
Agree 189 39.8
Disagree 17 3.6
Strongly Disagree 15 3.2 4. Financial incentives are better
motivation than any other rewards such as free trips, holidays, appreciation certificate etc.,
Strongly Agree 179 37.7
Agree 196 41.3
Disagree 76 16.0
Strongly Disagree 24 5.1 5. In enforcement and implementation of
EMS, there is a need to provide resources and support to the representatives at the management level.
Strongly Agree 242 50.9
Agree 218 45.9
Disagree 12 2.5
Strongly Disagree 3 0.6
6. There is a need to improve the communication processes between the external and internal stakeholders in order to discuss the environmental aspects very actively.
Strongly Agree 233 49.1
Agree 212 44.6
Disagree 27 5.7
Strongly Disagree 3 0.6
7. Employees should be consulted in all EMS-related matters for effective implementation.
Strongly Agree 266 56.0
Agree 196 41.3
Disagree 10 2.1
Strongly Disagree 3 0.6
8. Environmental success measures must be made by a public statute - to improve accountability and a broader level of engagement.
Strongly Agree 203 42.7
Agree 232 48.8
Disagree 34 7.2
Strongly Disagree 6 1.3
9. Increasing public knowledge of the ISO 14001 certification would result in greater understanding and marketability.
Strongly Agree 245 51.6
Agree 209 44.0
Disagree 18 3.8
Strongly Disagree 3 0.6
10. Encourage staff feedback and suggestions for environmental management for effective implementation.
Strongly Agree 268 56.4
Agree 189 39.8
Disagree 7 1.5
Strongly Disagree 11 2.3 11. Management commitment is not
necessarily important for the EMS implementation.
Strongly Agree 56 11.8
Agree 38 8.0
Disagree 130 27.4
Strongly Disagree 251 52.8
Table 4.6 continued 12. Employees' involvement/participation
will improve the EMS performance.
Strongly Agree 270 56.8
Agree 192 40.4
Disagree 4 0.8
Strongly Disagree 9 1.9
13. Management has to allocate adequate resources (Finance, Human, and Equipment) for improving the EMS performance.
Strongly Agree 294 61.9
Agree 174 36.6
Disagree 4 0.8
Strongly Disagree 3 0.6
14. Entities are encouraged to voluntarily comply with the requirements of EMS.
Strongly Agree 235 49.5
Agree 198 41.7
Disagree 28 5.9
Strongly Disagree 14 2.9 15. Local, Abu Dhabi Emirate-wide, the
legislative framework for the EMS will improve the EMS implementation in all the industrial sectors.
Strongly Agree 301 63.4
Agree 165 34.7
Disagree 3 0.6
Strongly Disagree 6 1.3
16.Regular monitoring and measurement of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) will improve the effectiveness of EMS implementation.
Strongly Agree 326 68.6
Agree 141 29.7
Disagree 8 1.7
Strongly Disagree - -
4.7 Reliability Testing Results
Cronbach Alpha is a reliability test conducted within SPSS to measure the internal consistency i.e. reliability of the measuring instrument (Questionnaire). It is most commonly used when the questionnaire is developed using multiple Likert scale statements and therefore to determine if the scale is reliable or not.
Table 4.7 depicts the reliability analysis of the evaluation of EMS in the Manufacturing sector on different attributes.
Table 4.7: Reliability analysis of part 2 questionnaire - Evaluation of EMS Cronbach’s Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized
Items
Number of Items
0.815 0.848 26
Cronbach's alpha is 0.815 in this situation, suggesting that the measuring instrument is very accurate. Furthermore, it shows a high degree of internal coherence in terms of decision-making variables. Table 4.8 highlights the questionnaire item analysis for the evaluation of EMS.
Table 4.8: Questionnaire item analysis – Evaluation of EMS
Questionnaire Item Cronbach’s
Alpha if Item deleted
1. My Organisation has an environmental management system in place 0.803 2. My company’s EMS is certified to the ISO 14001 0.807 3. There is an Environment, Health and Safety (HSE) or Environmental
department at the facility.
0.803 4. Top management is taking accountability for the EMS implementation. 0.800 5. Top management is effectively implementing the environmental policy 0.797 6. My employer is serious on EMS performance reporting. 0.796 7. My employer is determining the environmental aspects 0.798 8. My company is maintaining compliance to the legal requirements 0.804 9. My company has established targets and objectives for all the
significant environmental aspects.
0.795 10. My employer is providing the resources needed for the continual
improvement of the EMS.
0.798 11. My employer is not taking action to acquire the necessary competence
for the implementation of EMS.
0.828 12. All employees are not aware of the implementation of EMS. 0.829 13. I am not fully aware of the company’s environmental policy. 0.826 14. I am aware of the significant environmental aspects arising out of my
activities.
0.810 15. I am confused with my roles and responsibility in the implementation
of EMS.
0.833
Table 4.8 continued
16. I am not sure about the availability of the EMS documents in my organisation.
0.831 17. I do not know about the operational control procedures for managing
significant environmental aspects.
0.836 18. I am able to follow the emergency response plan in case of any
potential emergency.
0.811 19. My employer is regularly monitoring and measuring environmental
performance.
0.798 20. Non-compliance issues are identified in the EMS implementation. 0.804 21. My employer is conducting the internal audit at regular intervals at
least once a year.
0.800 22. Top management is conducting the review meeting at least once a
year to ensure the effectiveness of the EMS implementation.
0.793 23. My employer is committed to the continual improvement of EMS to
enhance environmental performance.
0.794 24. My company is not taking necessary corrective and preventive actions
to rectify the non-conformances.
0.831
25. EMS is implemented strictly in my company. 0.797
26. All employees are involved in the implementation of EMS. 0.797
Table 4.9 depicts the reliability analysis of the part 3 questionnaire focusing on the benefits of implementing EMS in the manufacturing sector on different attributes.
Table 4.9: Reliability analysis of Part 3 questionnaire Cronbach’s Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized
Items
Number of Items
0.849 0.860 14
Cronbach's Alpha is above 0.7 which means reliable data. The value for Cronbach’s Alpha, in this case, is 0.849 and it reflects the high reliability of the measuring instrument.
Furthermore, it indicates a high level of internal consistency with respect to the variables for the benefits of implementing EMS in the manufacturing sector. Table 4.10 highlights the
questionnaire item analysis of part 3 questions which compromise the benefits of implementing EMS.
Table 4.10: Questionnaire item analysis of part 3 questions
Questionnaire Item Cronbach’s
Alpha if Item deleted
1. Implementation of EMS cause extra workload to my regular activities. 0.883 2. Environment management system increased customer satisfaction. 0.833 3. Implementation of EMS protects the environment by controlling the
pollution arising out of the company activities.
0.841 4. Corporate image is enhanced with the implementation of EMS in my
company.
0.834 5. EMS increased the productivity and market share of our company. 0.828
6. EMS increased team effort and team spirit. 0.827
7. EMS lowers environment-related costs and fees. 0.837 8. EMS increases the profit margin of the company. 0.832 9. EMS increases the company’s access to new customers. 0.828 10. EMS enables direct savings through reductions in resource usages. 0.832 11. Implementation of EMS is necessary for manufacturing industries. 0.843 12. The implementation of ISO 14001 will affect my employment in a
positive way.
0.847 13. EMS improves the operational safety of the organization. 0.832 14. EMS provides economic advantages for the organization in the local
market.
0.836
Table 4.11 represents the reliability analysis of the part 4 questionnaire focusing on the drivers that drive the implementation of EMS in the manufacturing sector.
Table 4.11: Reliability analysis of part 4 questionnaire Cronbach’s Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized
Items
Number of Items
0.761 0.777 11
Cronbach's Alpha is above 0.7 which means reliable data. The value for Cronbach’s Alpha, in this case, is 0.761 and it reflects more reliability of the measuring instrument.
Furthermore, it indicates the high level of internal consistency with respect to the variables for the drivers that drive the implementation of EMS in the manufacturing sector. Table 4.12 highlights the questionnaire item analysis of part 4 questions which compromise the key drivers of implementing EMS.
Table 4.12: Questionnaire item analysis of part 4 questions
Questionnaire Item Cronbach’s
Alpha if Item deleted
1. Top management commitment towards an eco-friendly environment influences the company to implement EMS effectively.
0.734 2. Customers influence on EMS certification such as ISO 14001. 0.741 3. Degree of competition influences the company to implement EMS to
have a competitive edge.
0.733 4. Pressure from the community, including non-governmental
organizations, environmental groups, neighbourhood organizations and the media.
0.784
5. We implement the EMS to enhance the corporate image. 0.737 6. EMS encourages our company to adopt voluntary compliance with
local government regulations, industry standards and International Standards.
0.727
7. Lowering costs and risks, are among the economic drivers for EMS adoption and certification.
0.734 8. The needs to increase process efficiency is one of the economic drivers
for EMS adoption and certification.
0.736 9. The legal requirements are the main reason for the company to
implement environmental initiatives.
0.764 10. EMS assists in avoiding legal violations/fines/penalties. 0.746 11. The characteristics of the product make it necessary to implement
EMS.
0.737
Table 4.13 shows the reliability analysis of the part 5 questionnaire, which focuses on the factors that challenge implementing EMS in the manufacturing sector.
Table 4.13: Reliability analysis of part 5 questionnaire Cronbach’s Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized
Items
Number of Items
0.751 0.750 08
Cronbach's Alpha is more than 0.7, indicating that the data is reliable. Cronbach's Alpha is 0.751 in this situation, indicating that the measuring instrument is very reliable.
Furthermore, it shows a high level of internal consistency in terms of the variables that challenge EMS implementation in the manufacturing sector. Table 4.14 shows the item analysis of part 5 items in the questionnaire, which reveal the challenges for EMS implementation.
Table 4.14: Questionnaire item analysis of part 5 questions
Questionnaire Item Cronbach’s
Alpha if Item deleted
1. I have adapted to the EMS way of doing my activities. 0.713 2. My company spent a lot of money in implementing the EMS. 0.774 3. I am familiar with how EMS works in my company. 0.698 4. We have competent persons to implement and maintain the EMS
certification.
0.711 5. I have been provided clear instructions on how to protect the
environment.
0.688 6. I have been given the opportunity to acquire relevant knowledge on
EMS by means of training.
0.711
7. I need more training on the EMS. 0.770
8. The Environment Agency in Abu Dhabi is strict in enforcing environmental laws.
0.720