*5.2. Managerial Implications*

Managers within the food industry must handle high levels of competition, relatively low-profit margins and increasing levels of governmental regulation, in addition to supply chain complexity. In navigating this environment, these managers need to match operational capabilities with evolving consumer preferences [27,64]. One of the contributions of this study is to provide clarity by developing a robust, theoretically grounded and empirically validated framework for the product, process, and FSC quality. This clarity is important because prior quality frameworks (e.g., Garvin's [24]) do not capture the socially embedded nature of food products. Accurate and comprehensive quality dimensions allow managers at all levels to assess the ability of their enterprise to deliver on product claims, and, in turn, to satisfy consumer demand and expectations. In addition, Tables 1 and 3 identify general convention attributes as well as specific examples of practices that managers may consider adopting in order to support their selected quality conventions.

In addition, we highlight the need to manage a number of tradeoffs in order to reduce the potential for quality failures. In particular, our findings suggest that firms that attempt to move from Niche to Growth positions and from Mainstream to Growth are vulnerable to systemic quality failures. We find that firms in these transitions may be particularly susceptible to allowing the pressures of achieving scale and scope to detract from or erode important quality conventions. Quality failures for conventions that are sources of differentiation and order winners (e.g., organic production methods or pasture-raised eggs), the potential for damage to the firm in terms of reputation and market share is severe. Our analysis of cases across the typology suggests that firms seeking differentiation through Niche or Growth must compete with possible substitute products that make similar claims (e.g., *local* claims for what is objectively a Mainstream product). The value, therefore, of a quality convention, may be diminished by: (1) Spurious use of similar claims by the competition; (2) Lack of transparency across competing FSCs; (3) Limited consumer ability to evaluate the authenticity of quality conventions; and (4) Lack of regulatory definitions for quality claims. It is therefore critical for managers to understand the quality conventions attached to various products, to develop and maintain alignment between operations and marketing functions, and to monitor and remedy quality issues throughout the FSC. Furthermore, for firms choosing to transition between quadrants, or choosing to occupy more than one quadrant, managers should consider the resource requirements necessary for pursuing an ambidextrous strategy [56,58,74]. In addition, managers need to be particularly careful when spanning quadrants where one convention may trade off with another (e.g., Niche and Growth). Where these tradeoffs exist at the quality convention level, managers should consider the extent to which resources need to be duplicated rather than shared to avoid conflicts between conventions.

Given the lack of standard definitions and regulatory protections for some methods, particularly within the Niche quadrant, managers make seek to defend their quality claims by developing local or regional institutions and branding [75,83]. In addition to the potential to develop a collective and visible presence via such institutions, we have observed at least one case within our sample where a cooperative institution allowed producers to share resources and reduced the cost of valuable certifications and infrastructure. While conducted at a national level, the Origin Green/Bord Bia program of Ireland is a best practice exemplar for collaboration between policy-making institutions and industry to develop shared sustainability standards, share resources, and develop branding to support increasing demand [83].

One potential value-add for managers adopting a quality conventions framework is that it can be used to decide and convey how social and ecological sustainability concerns are integrated into firm and supply chain strategy. We suggest that the quality conventions approach enables FSC strategy to be set, communicated, and implemented with greater authenticity than more narrow approaches. Placing sustainability under the umbrella of quality management renders these formerly ancillary considerations central to the operations management function.

We acknowledge that it is unlikely that a for-profit firm will make civic conventions their first priority. However, incorporating this dimension, to the extent deemed appropriate, directly into the quality management and supply chain strategy enables firms to articulate their social sustainability in a manner that minimizes the potential for to be perceived as engaging in impression management rather than making an actual civic contribution.
