Purpose: The main aim of the article is to present the results of research of entrepreneurs who maintain a certified quality management system in terms of leading factors supporting decisions of a preventive approach to management. Design/methodology/approach: Interview method conducted in manufacturing companies with an implemented and certified quality management system using CATI technique Findings: Research has shown that in large industrial enterprises the key stimulants of preventive actions are, above all, efficient information flow, technical and organizational order, as well as consistent pursuit of the goal. Smaller enterprises put the main emphasis on maintaining good relations with the environment, safety and ergonomics of work, as well as skillful selection of suppliers. Research limitations/implications: The authors of the paper see the need to continue research in the field of in-depth analysis of selected factors in relation to the effectiveness of the actions taken and the possibility of supporting information. Practical implications: Entrepreneurs with knowledge of key stimulants will make decisions more consciously and focused on a targeted analysis of data in order to search for relevant premises to prevent non-compliance. Originality/value: This paper concerns key factors influencing a preventive approach that can support decision-making. For the purposes of multicriteria decision-making processes, it is valuable to know the key stimuli characteristic of effective preventive actions. An additional value of the article is the showing of the factors with a differentiation by company size. This enables a more relevant focus of the research results. Keywords: decision making, prevention of non-conformities, quality management. Category of the paper: Research paper.

This study examines entrepreneurs’ awareness and preventive activities regarding the environment and employees as key elements of the Quality 5.0 concept. Quantitative research was conducted among manufacturing companies in Greater Poland that had not implemented or certified a quality management system. Data were collected using CATI interviews based on an original questionnaire assessing the importance and implementation of 24 preventive management factors, with detailed analysis of 10 factors. A quota-random sample of 380 enterprises, stratified by company size, was used. The findings indicate that maintaining good relationships with the environment, ensuring occupational safety and ergonomics, careful supplier selection and continuous evaluation, and improving employees’ qualifications and skills are perceived as the most important preventive management factors. Environmental relations and workplace safety also achieved the highest implementation levels, suggesting their strongest contribution to a preventive management approach. In contrast, participatory management received relatively low importance and implementation ratings, highlighting the need for further investigation. The results emphasize the role of preventive management practices in supporting the Quality 5.0 concept and provide practical guidance for organizations seeking to strengthen sustainable, employee-oriented, and proactive management approaches.

This study examines entrepreneurs’ awareness and preventive activities regarding the environment and employees as key elements of the Quality 5.0 concept. Quantitative research was conducted among 380 manufacturing companies in Greater Poland that had not implemented or certified a quality management system. Data were collected using CATI interviews using an original questionnaire assessing the importance and implementation of 24 preventive management factors, with a detailed analysis of 10 factors. The findings identify maintaining good relations with the environment (K2), careful supplier selection and continuous evaluation (K3), improving employee qualifications and skills (K7), and ensuring occupational safety and ergonomics (K8) as the most important preventive management factors. The combined IPA and paired analyses identify K7—improving employee qualifications and skills—as the clearest improvement priority: it was the only factor in the “concentrate here” quadrant, had the largest importance–implementation gap (0.34), and the largest rank-biserial effect (r_rb = 0.639). K2—maintaining good relations with the environment—and K8—ensuring occupational safety and ergonomics—combined high importance with high implementation and should therefore be maintained, while K5—selection of employees based on their competencies—also warrants attention due to its gap of 0.28. Paired Wilcoxon tests showed statistically significant implementation shortfalls for all ten factors after Holm correction, indicating that the gap between perceived importance and implementation is systematic. Participatory management (K6) received the lowest importance and implementation ratings, although its large paired effect suggests that its relatively low IPA priority should not be interpreted as evidence of low relevance. Associations with company size and years in operation were generally weak and factor-specific. The results contribute to understanding preventive management as a basis for sustainable, human-centered, and proactive Quality 5.0 practices. They suggest that managerial priorities should consider both the relative IPA position and the magnitude of importance–implementation gaps, with particular attention to employee competence development and participatory management. The results emphasize the role of preventive management practices in supporting the Quality 5.0 concept and provide practical guidance for organizations seeking to strengthen sustainable, employee-oriented, and proactive management approaches.