The increasing interest of schools in continuous improvement as a tool to assure excellence and quality is now a reality. Quality Management Systems (QMS) are implemented in this type of organisations to achieve precisely these objectives, among others. Evaluation of the impact (understood as substantial and sustainable changes) generated by implementing QMS in schools, is of great importance for the education community. One of the elements of interest in this context is evaluation of the impact on School Climate and level of Satisfaction of the school members. 

There are many factors that can influence Climate and Satisfaction in a school, and these concepts are significantly related (Zullig, Huebner and Patton, 2011). There are studies that confirm the effect of School Climate on academic performance (Gage, Larson, Sugai and Chafouleas, 2016), on the psychological health of students (Desrumaux et al., 2015), on diminishing disruptive conduct (O'Brennan, Bradshaw and Furlong, 2014), and on greater family involvement in the school (Amatea and West, 2007), among others. Therefore, it is of interest to evaluate improvements in School Climate brought about by the implementation of QMS.

Regarding factors which have an influence on the Satisfaction of the community education members, the quality of the service provided stands out (Lazibat, Baković and Dužević, 2014). Particularly, teacher satisfaction is influenced by factors related to the Management Team, such as leadership style (John, 2017), their relationship with teachers and recognition of their work (Lacireno-Paquet, Bocala and Bailey, 2016). Elements related to their teaching practice, such as the use of new technologies also influence their satisfaction (Unal and Unal, 2017). Among the personal factors that have an impact is perceived self-efficacy (Aldridge and Fraser, 2016). Authors such as Gil-Flores (2017) have also mentioned, in this context, the influence of controlling classroom discipline, age, sex, years in the school and work status. This author also highlighted teacher-student relationships as an institutional factor that explains teachers' work satisfaction.

On the other hand, family satisfaction depends on factors such as their children's academic performance (Hampden-Thompson and Galindo, 2017), the extent to which families receive information on their children from the school, their level of participation, and appropriateness of school resources (Friedman, Bobrowski and Markow, 2007). This all leads to the question of to what extent does implementation of a QMS in a school improve Teacher, Student and Family Satisfaction, among others.

Therefore, the main objective of this study was to analyse and compare the impact which the implementation of two of the most widely used QMS in educational organisations (ISO 9001 Standards and the excellence model of the European Foundation for Quality Management -EFQM-) had on School Climate and Satisfaction of members of schools where it had been implemented for at least 3 years.

We conducted a non-experimental, exploratory and ex-post-facto study, for which we used a tool to evaluate the impact that implementation of a QMS had on several school dimensions, among them, School Climate and Satisfaction of the education community members. The tool (21 items -Likert-type scale from 1 to 5), showed satisfactory levels in the psychometric requirements of validity and reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.975). The questionnaire was divided into 17 items to study School Climate (Rules of Coexistence, Interpersonal Relationships, Conflict Resolution, Teacher Cooperation, Family Involvement and Overall Assessment) and 4 items for Satisfaction (of Teachers, Students, Families and Overall Assessment). Field work was carried out in Preschool, Primary and Secondary Education schools in the Autonomous Communities of Madrid (27.4%), Andalusia (42.4%), Valencia (10.1%) and Castilla y León (20%), with 73.3% being private schools with state subsidies, 11.7% private and 15% public. Schools could participate if they had implemented the QMS for at least 3 years, with 24.4% of the schools having a EFQM system and 75.6% ISO:9001 STANDARDS. Likewise, we required teachers in the survey to have worked at the school for 3 years (24.9% with 5 years or less of service, 25.4% between 6 and 10 years and 49.7% more than 11 years). We collected 2,901 questionnaires (37.8% male and 62.2% female), of which 85.6% were teachers, 2.8% heads of quality at the school and 11.6% members of the Management Team. Regarding the size of the schools, 39.5% had less than 500 students, 37% between 500 and 1,000 students and 23.5% more than 1,000 students. Once we compiled the data, we conducted descriptive analyses of Climate and Satisfaction and, then, differential analyses (independent sample t-test, ANOVA and Scheffé with a significance level of .01) to determine any differences between the impact of implementing the two QMS (EFQM and ISO:9001 STANDARDS) on the dimensions studied (using software SPSS). We also conducted differential analyses based on other category variables, such as type of school, position, region, years of implementation of QMS, age, etc.

The results of the descriptive studies showed that the implementation of both QMS had a moderate impact on the dimensions School Climate and Satisfaction of the school community members, with higher values in the schools that had implemented the EFQM model, versus those with ISO:9001 STANDARDS, on both dimensions (Climate: EFQM - 3.22; ISO:9001 - 2.86; Satisfaction: EFQM - 3.25; ISO:9001 - 2.88). The differential analyses conducted showed that, in general, private schools with state subsidies, of the Community of Valencia or Andalusia, who had implemented QMS for more than 9 years and with no more than 29 teachers, had a higher impact on the dimensions School Climate and Satisfaction, as well as higher assessments from the Management Team or the Quality Coordinators, compared to those from teachers. However, the differential analyses based on the QMS implemented, showed no significant differences in either dimension (Student's t - p>0.01). On the one hand, the results of the dimension School Climate only showed significant differences in improvement of family-school relationships (F=18.474; Sig.=.000) and improvement of teacher-student relationships (F=16.283; Sig.=.000), with the EFQM model being the one with the highest impact on both items. On the other hand, in the dimension Satisfaction of school members, we found significant differences in teacher satisfaction (F=11.673; Sig.=.001) and student satisfaction (F=11.609; Sig.=.001), and once again the schools with the EFQM model were the ones with significantly higher scores compared to those schools with ISO:9001 STANDARDS. Nonetheless, no significant differences were found in family satisfaction.

-Aldridge, J. M., & Fraser, B. J. (2016). Teachers’ views of their school climate and its relationship with teacher self-efficacy and job satisfaction. Learning Environments Research, 19(2), 291-307. -Amatea, E.S., & West, C.A. (2007). Joining the conversation about educating our poorest children: Emerging leadership roles for school counselors in high poverty schools. Professional School Counseling, 11. -Desrumaux, P., Lapointe, D., Sima, M. N., Boudrias, J. S., Savoie, A., & Brunet, L. (2015). The impact of job demands, climate, and optimism on well-being and distress at work: What are the mediating effects of basic psychological need satisfaction? Revue Européenne De Psychologie Appliquée/European Review of Applied Psychology, 65(4), 179-188. -Friedman, B. A., Bobrowski, P. E., & Markow, D. (2007). Predictors of parents’ satisfaction with their children’s school. Journal of Educational Administration, 45, 278-288 -Gage, N. A., Larson, A., Sugai, G., & Chafouleas, S. M. (2016). Student perceptions of school climate as predictors of office discipline referrals. American Educational Research Journal, 53(3), 492-515. -Gil-Flores, J. (2017). Características personales y de los centros educativos en la explicación de la satisfacción laboral del profesorado. Revista de Psicodidáctica, 22(1), 16-22. -Hampden-Thompson, G., & Galindo, C. (2017). School–family relationships, school satisfaction and the academic achievement of young people. Educational Review, 69(2), 248-265. -John, M. C. (2017). Leadership style, school climate, and the institutional commitment of teachers. In International Forum Journal, 1(2). -Lacireno-Paquet, N., Bocala, C., & Bailey, J. (2016). Relationship between school profesional climate and teachers’ satisfaction with the evaluation process (REL 2016–133). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Northeast & Islands. -Lazibat, T., Baković, T., & Dužević, I. (2014). How perceived service quality influences students' satisfaction? Teachers' and students' perspectives. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 25(7-8), 923-934. -O’Brennan, L. M., Bradshaw, C. P., & Furlong, M. J. (2014). Influence of classroom and school climate on teacher perceptions of student problem behavior. School mental health, 6(2), 125-136. -Unal, Z., & Unal, A. (2017). Comparison of Student Performance, Student Perception, and Teacher Satisfaction with Traditional versus Flipped Classroom Models. International Journal of Instruction, 10(4). -Zullig, K. J., Huebner, E. S., & Patton, J. M. (2011). Relationships among school climate domains and school satisfaction. Psychology in the Schools, 48(2), 133–145.