Risk management as a crucial and challenging process for medical devices SMEs: evidence from a multiple case study on Brazilian and Portuguese startups
Loading...
External sources
External sources
Date
Advisor
Coadvisor
Graduate program
Undergraduate course
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Emerald
Type
Article
Access right
Acesso restrito
External sources
External sources
Abstract
Purpose The medical devices industry has many small businesses with innovation potential, and managing risks is a crucial process required by the different regulations applied to them. In this context, this research aims to investigate the risk-management practices of technology-based small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the sector, to identify characteristics and possible difficulties in structuring and carrying out the process, providing support based on literature discussions. Design/methodology/approach The authors adopted a qualitative methodology based on a multiple case study. The exploratory research included six Brazilian and five Portuguese companies from the medical devices sector, whose risk-management approaches were described and analyzed through semi-structured interviews. The interviews were conducted with experts who work in companies’ quality management systems. Findings The results suggest that different risk-management methods can be applied to products regardless of their risk classification. There is a need for continuous employee training in risk-management techniques, as previous experience tends to impact overcoming implementation challenges. It was also identified that, especially in Brazil, the auditors’ risk-management analysis is subjective and that more standardization of audits of medical device companies’ quality management systems should be considered. Originality/value The study emphasizes the development of a structured systematic for implementing risk-management processes, which is especially beneficial for SMEs. The case studies provide practical knowledge for other companies to evaluate risk-management practices. Although the results cannot be generalized, this original research supports the existing gaps and excites new discussions in the field.





