Results of Delphi rounds 2 and 3 in relation to procedural barriers
| Procedural barrier | Participant agreement (%) | Consensus |
|---|---|---|
| Difficulties in introducing new processes | 86.66% in round 2 | ✓ |
| Increased bureaucracy | 83.33% in round 2 | ✓ |
| Lack of consulting support | 80.00% in round 2 | ✓ |
| Time consuming effort for improvements | 80.76% in round 3 | ✓ |
| Misunderstanding of the benefits of AMS | 76.92% in round 3 | - |
| Misunderstandings about ISO standards | 61.53% in round 3 | - |
| Restrictions due to laws and regulations | 61.53% in round 3 | - |
| Lack of planning of AMS implementation | 57.69% in round 3 | - |
| Lack of commitment to innovation and continuous improvement | 57.69% in round 3 | - |
| Lack of understanding of stakeholder’ needs | 57.69% in round 3 | - |
| Difficulties in interpreting ISO clauses and requirements | 53.84% in round 3 | - |
| Time consuming approval procedures | 53.84% in round 3 | - |
| Unrealistic expectations of AMS | 50.00% in round 3 | - |
| Procedural barrier | Participant agreement (%) | Consensus |
|---|---|---|
| Difficulties in introducing new processes | 86.66% in round 2 | ✓ |
| Increased bureaucracy | 83.33% in round 2 | ✓ |
| Lack of consulting support | 80.00% in round 2 | ✓ |
| Time consuming effort for improvements | 80.76% in round 3 | ✓ |
| Misunderstanding of the benefits of AMS | 76.92% in round 3 | - |
| Misunderstandings about ISO standards | 61.53% in round 3 | - |
| Restrictions due to laws and regulations | 61.53% in round 3 | - |
| Lack of planning of AMS implementation | 57.69% in round 3 | - |
| Lack of commitment to innovation and continuous improvement | 57.69% in round 3 | - |
| Lack of understanding of stakeholder’ needs | 57.69% in round 3 | - |
| Difficulties in interpreting ISO clauses and requirements | 53.84% in round 3 | - |
| Time consuming approval procedures | 53.84% in round 3 | - |
| Unrealistic expectations of AMS | 50.00% in round 3 | - |
Note(s): Consensus for barrier inclusion was reached when ≥ 80% of participants rated the barrier as “very important” or “extremely important,” and the IQR was ≤ 1. No consensus for inclusion occurred when > 20% but < 80% of participants rated the barrier as “very important” or “extremely important.”