Hubbry Logo
Quality (business)Quality (business)Main
Open search
Quality (business)
Community hub
Quality (business)
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Quality (business)
Quality (business)
Quality (business)
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

In business, engineering, and manufacturing, quality – or high quality – has a pragmatic interpretation as the non-inferiority or superiority of something (goods or services); it is also defined as being suitable for the intended purpose (fitness for purpose) while satisfying customer expectations. Quality is a perceptual, conditional, and somewhat subjective attribute and may be understood differently by different people.[1][2] Consumers may focus on the specification quality of a product/service, or how it compares to competitors in the marketplace. Producers might measure the conformance quality, or degree to which the product/service was produced correctly. Support personnel may measure quality in the degree that a product is reliable, maintainable, or sustainable. In such ways, the subjectivity of quality is rendered objective via operational definitions and measured with metrics such as proxy measures.

In a general manner, quality in business consists of "producing a good or service that conforms [to the specification of the client] the first time, in the right quantity, and at the right time".[3] The product or service should not be lower or higher than the specification (under or overquality). Overquality leads to unnecessary additional production costs.

Description

[edit]

There are many aspects of quality in a business context, though primary is the idea the business produces something, whether it be a physical good or a particular service. These goods and/or services and how they are produced involve many types of processes, procedures, equipment, personnel, and investments, which all fall under the quality umbrella. Key aspects of quality and how it's diffused throughout the business are rooted in the concept of quality management:[1][2]

  1. Quality planning is implemented as a means of "developing the products, systems, and processes needed to meet or exceed customer expectations."[1] This includes defining who the customers are, determining their needs, and developing the tools (systems, processes, etc.) needed to meet those needs.
  2. Quality assurance is implemented as a means of providing enough confidence that business requirements and goals (as outlined in quality planning) for a product and/or service will be fulfilled. This error prevention is done through systematic measurement, comparison with a standard, and monitoring of processes.
  3. Quality control (QC) is implemented as a means of fulfilling quality requirements, reviewing all factors involved in production. The business confirms that the good or service produced meets organizational goals, often using tools such as operational auditing and inspection. QC is focused on process output.
  4. Quality improvement is implemented as a means of providing mechanisms for the evaluation and improvement of processes, etc. in the light of their efficiency, effectiveness, and flexibility. This may be done with noticeably significant changes or incrementally via continual improvement.

While quality management and its tenets are relatively recent phenomena, the idea of quality in business is not new. In the early 1900s, pioneers such as Frederick Winslow Taylor and Henry Ford recognized the limitations of the methods being used in mass production at the time and the subsequent varying quality of output, implementing quality control, inspection, and standardization procedures in their work.[4][5] Later in the twentieth century, the likes of William Edwards Deming and Joseph M. Juran helped take quality to new heights, initially in Japan and later (in the late '70s and early '80s) globally.[2][6]

Customers recognize that quality is an important attribute in products and services, and suppliers recognize that quality can be an important differentiator between their own offerings and those of competitors (the quality gap). In the past two decades this quality gap has been gradually decreasing between competitive products and services. This is partly due to the contracting (also called outsourcing) of manufacturing to countries like China and India, as well internationalization of trade and competition. These countries, among many others, have raised their own standards of quality in order to meet international standards and customer demands.[7][8] The ISO 9000 series of standards are probably the best known international standards for quality management, though specialized standards such as ISO 15189 (for medical laboratories) and ISO 14001 (for environmental management) also exist.[9]

The business meanings of quality have developed over time. Various interpretations are given below:

  1. American Society for Quality: "A combination of quantitative and qualitative perspectives for which each person has his or her own definition; examples of which include, "Meeting the requirements and expectations in service or product that were committed to" and "Pursuit of optimal solutions contributing to confirmed successes, fulfilling accountabilities". In technical usage, quality can have two meanings:
    a. The characteristics of a product or service that bear on its ability to satisfy stated or implied needs;
    b. A product or service free of deficiencies."[10]
  2. Subir Chowdhury: "Quality combines people power and process power."[11]
  3. Philip B. Crosby: "Conformance to requirements."[10][12] The requirements may not fully represent customer expectations; Crosby treats this as a separate problem.
  4. W. Edwards Deming: concentrating on "the efficient production of the quality that the market expects,"[13] and he linked quality and management: "Costs go down and productivity goes up as improvement of quality is accomplished by better management of design, engineering, testing and by improvement of processes."[14]
  5. Peter Drucker: "Quality in a product or service is not what the supplier puts in. It is what the customer gets out and is willing to pay for."[15]
  6. ISO 9000: "Degree to which a set of inherent characteristics fulfills requirements."[16] The standard defines requirement as need or expectation.
  7. Joseph M. Juran: "Fitness for use."[10] Fitness is defined by the customer.
  8. Noriaki Kano and others, present a two-dimensional model of quality: "must-be quality" and "attractive quality."[17] The former is near to "fitness for use" and the latter is what the customer would love, but has not yet thought about. Supporters characterize this model more succinctly as: "Products and services that meet or exceed customers' expectations."
  9. Robert Pirsig: "The result of care."[18]
  10. Six Sigma: "Number of defects per million opportunities."[19]
  11. Genichi Taguchi, with two definitions:
    a. "Uniformity around a target value."[20] The idea is to lower the standard deviation in outcomes, and to keep the range of outcomes to a certain number of standard deviations, with rare exceptions.
    b. "The loss a product imposes on society after it is shipped."[21] This definition of quality is based on a more comprehensive view of the production system.
  12. Gerald M. Weinberg: "Value to some person".[22]

Market sector perspectives

[edit]

Operations management

[edit]

Traditionally, quality acts as one of five operations/project performance objectives dictated by operations management policy. Operations management, by definition, focuses on the most effective and efficient ways for creating and delivering a good or service that satisfies customer needs and expectations.[23] As such, its ties to quality are apparent. The five performance objectives which give business a way to measure their operational performance are:[24][25]

  • quality, measuring how well a product or service conforms to specifications;
  • speed (or response time), measuring the delay between customer request and customer receipt of a product or service;
  • dependability, measuring how consistently a product or service can be delivered to meet customer expectation;
  • flexibility, measuring how quickly the business can adapt to a variety of market changes; and
  • cost, measuring the resources (and by extension, financed) required to plan, deliver, and improve the finished good or service.

Based on an earlier model called the sand cone model, these objectives support each other, with quality at the base.[26][25] By extension, quality increases dependability, reduces cost, and increases customer satisfaction.[25]

Manufacturing

[edit]

The early 1920s saw a slow but gradual movement among manufacturers away from a "maximum production" philosophy to one aligned more closely with "positive and continuous control of quality to definite standards in the factory."[27][5] That standardization, further pioneered by Deming and Juran later in the twentieth century,[2][6] has become deeply integrated into how manufacturing businesses operate today. The introduction of the ISO 9001, 9002, and 9003 standards in 1987 — based on work from previous British and U.S. military standards — sought to "provide organizations with the requirements to create a quality management system (QMS) for a range of different business activities."[28] Additionally, good manufacturing practice (GMP) standards became more common place in countries around the world, laying out the minimum requirements manufacturers in industries including food and beverages,[29] cosmetics,[30] pharmaceutical products,[31] dietary supplements,[32] and medical devices[33] must meet to assure their products are consistently high in quality. Process improvement philosophies such as Six Sigma and Lean Six Sigma have further pushed quality to the forefront of business management and operations. At the heart of these and other efforts is often the QMS, a documented collection of processes, management models, business strategies, human capital, and information technology used to plan, develop, deploy, evaluate, and improve a set of models, methods, and tools across an organization for the purpose of improving quality that aligns with the organization's strategic goals.[34][35]

Service sector

[edit]

The push to integrate the concept of quality into the functions of the service industry takes a slightly different path from manufacturing. Where manufacturers focus on "tangible, visible, persistent issues," many — but not all — quality aspects of the service provider's output are intangible and fleeting.[36][37][38] Other obstacles include management's perceptions not aligning with customer expectations due to lack of communication and market research and the improper or lack of delivery of skill-based knowledge to personnel.[36][37] Like manufacturing, customer expectations are key in the service industry, though the degree with which the service interacts with the customer definitely shapes perceived service quality. Perceptions such as being dependable, responsive, understanding, competent, and clean (which are difficult to describe tangibly) may drive service quality,[39] somewhat in contrast to factors that drive measurement of manufacturing quality.

Quality in Japanese culture

[edit]

In Japanese culture, there are two types of quality: atarimae hinshitsu and miryokuteki hinshitsu.[40]

  • atarimae hinshitsu　– The idea that things will work as they are supposed to (e.g. a pen will write). The functional requirement actually. For example, a wall or flooring in a house have functional parts in the house as a product; when the functionality is met, the "atarimae" quality requirement is met.
  • miryokuteki hinshitsu (魅力的品質) – The idea that things should have an aesthetic quality which is different from "atarimae hinshitsu" (e.g. a pen will write in a way that is pleasing to the writer, and leave behind ink that is pleasing to the reader). The floor and wall example can be expanded to include the color, texture, shine, polish, etc., which are the "miryokuteki" aspects. Such aspects comprise a very important part of the quality, and add value to the product.

In the design of goods or services, atarimae hinshitsu and miryokuteki hinshitsu together ensure that a creation will both work to customers' expectations and also be desirable to have.

Quality management techniques

[edit]

Quality awards

[edit]
Main article: List of national quality awards

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Bibliography

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Quality (business)

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
In business, quality is defined as the degree to which a set of inherent characteristics of a product, service, or fulfills specified requirements. This encompasses not only conformance to technical standards but also fitness for intended use and the pursuit of excellence to meet or exceed expectations. At its core, in business involves systematic frameworks and practices aimed at achieving consistent , reducing defects, and driving continuous improvement across organizational operations. The historical development of quality in business began with medieval guilds in the 13th century, where craftsmen ensured standards through collective oversight, but modern practices emerged in the late 19th and early 20th centuries amid industrialization and . Key advancements include Walter Shewhart's invention of the in 1924, which introduced to monitor production variability. Post-World War II, figures like and promoted quality as a strategic imperative, particularly in , where their teachings influenced the rise of reliable manufacturing and economic recovery. This evolution culminated in the 1980s with (TQM), a holistic approach that integrates customer focus, , and ongoing process refinement for long-term organizational success. Central to quality management are seven foundational principles: customer focus, which prioritizes understanding and meeting needs; , to establish a unified direction; engagement of people, fostering involvement at all levels; process approach, for efficient resource use; improvement, as a permanent objective; evidence-based , relying on ; and relationship management, to sustain beneficial partnerships. Frameworks like the ISO 9001 standard provide structured requirements for systems (QMS), enabling and global to ensure compliance and adaptability. These elements underscore quality's role in enhancing competitiveness by lowering costs through defect prevention, boosting , and supporting sustainable growth in dynamic markets.

Definitions and Concepts

Definition of Quality in Business

In business, is fundamentally defined as the degree to which a product or service fulfills specified requirements, thereby meeting expectations and enabling its intended use. This core concept emphasizes conformance to established specifications as a measurable indicator of performance, ensuring that outputs align with predefined standards derived from needs. Business interpretations of quality have varied among key thinkers, with describing it as "fitness for use," focusing on how well a product or service satisfies its purpose in meeting user requirements across design, conformance, and reliability. In contrast, defined quality as conformance to requirements, advocating for an "absence of defects" standard where zero deviations represent the ideal performance level. Another perspective views quality as perceived value relative to cost, balancing performance attributes against price to deliver . The term quality in business has evolved from an inspection-based approach, which relied on detecting defects post-production, to a customer-centric view that prioritizes prevention and alignment with user expectations throughout the process. This shift underscores as a holistic, organization-wide commitment, as articulated by : "Quality is everyone's responsibility."

Dimensions and Attributes of Quality

In business, quality is multifaceted, encompassing various dimensions that allow organizations to evaluate and improve products and services systematically. One influential framework is David Garvin's , introduced in his article, which provides a comprehensive lens for assessing product quality beyond mere conformance to specifications. These dimensions include: , the primary operating characteristics such as speed or output; features, additional elements that supplement basic functionality, like extra settings on a camera; reliability, the probability of failure-free operation over time; conformance, the degree to which a product meets established standards; , the lifespan or usage before replacement; serviceability, the ease and speed of repair; , how the product appeals to the senses, including look, feel, and sound; and perceived quality, the customer's impression often shaped by brand reputation. For service-oriented businesses, the model, developed by A. Parasuraman, Valarie A. Zeithaml, and Leonard L. Berry in their 1988 Journal of Retailing paper, adapts quality assessment to intangible offerings by identifying five key dimensions: tangibles, the physical facilities, equipment, and appearance of personnel; reliability, the ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately; , the willingness to help customers and provide prompt service; assurance, the knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to inspire trust and confidence; and , the provision of caring, individualized attention to customers. This model emphasizes the gap between customer expectations and perceptions, enabling service providers to target improvements in . Dimensions of quality often involve inherent trade-offs, as enhancing one attribute may compromise another or increase costs; for instance, improving through premium materials can raise production expenses, potentially conflicting with affordability goals, as discussed in literature by scholars like in his 1988 work on . Measurement of these dimensions presents challenges, particularly in distinguishing objective attributes—such as reliability measured via failure rates—from subjective ones like or perceived quality, which rely on customer surveys and can vary culturally or individually, complicating as noted in Garvin's framework extensions.

Historical Development

Early Quality Practices

Early quality practices in business trace their roots to pre-industrial societies, where craftsmanship and trade relied on communal oversight to ensure consistent standards. In medieval Europe, craft guilds emerged during the 11th to 13th centuries amid economic growth and urban revival, organizing artisans in trades such as textiles, metalworking, and baking to maintain high-quality output and protect members' interests. These guilds enforced rigorous standards through hierarchical structures, including masters who oversaw workshops, journeymen as skilled laborers, and apprentices who underwent extended training periods of five to nine years, often starting in their teens, to master techniques and uphold traditions. Guilds appointed "searchers" to inspect goods and workshops, imposing fines or expulsion for substandard work, which fostered trust in markets and stabilized trade by preventing fraud and ensuring uniformity in products. The marked a significant shift, prioritizing and over individualized craftsmanship, often at the expense of . Frederick Winslow Taylor's Principles of Scientific Management, published in 1911, epitomized this transition by advocating for time-motion studies and standardized workflows to maximize output, such as increasing pig iron handling from 12.5 to 47.5 tons per day per worker through optimized methods and incentives. Taylor's approach divided labor responsibilities between management (planning and supervision) and workers (execution), emphasizing scientific selection and training to boost , though it largely overlooked in favor of metrics like wage increases of 30% to 100%. This focus on speed and volume in factories contrasted with guild-era practices, leading to inconsistent product quality amid rapid mechanization. By the early , responses to industrial inconsistencies introduced more systematic methods. In 1924, at Bell Telephone Laboratories developed the first in a dated May 16, pioneering statistical by distinguishing random process variations from assignable causes through graphical monitoring of production data. This innovation, detailed in Shewhart's 1931 book Economic Control of Quality of Manufactured Product, enabled manufacturers to sample outputs and adjust processes proactively, laying the groundwork for data-driven beyond manual checks. Parallel to these advancements, formal efforts emerged to support across industries. The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), founded in 1898 by chemist Charles B. Dudley and 70 engineers in , addressed rail failures and material inconsistencies plaguing railroads by developing consensus-based standards, issuing its first on rails in 1901. ASTM's work promoted uniform testing protocols and specifications, influencing business practices in , , and beyond by ensuring reliability and safety without relying solely on individual inspections.

Post-War Evolution and Key Influences

Following , faced severe economic challenges but rapidly transformed its industrial landscape through the adoption of advanced quality practices. In 1950, American statistician was invited by the Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE) to deliver a series of lectures to top Japanese executives and engineers at the Conference Center, where he emphasized statistical quality control (SQC) techniques to reduce variability in processes. These lectures, which built on earlier work by Walter Shewhart, introduced methods like control charts to monitor production and prevent defects, marking a shift from inspection-based approaches to proactive process improvement. In recognition of Deming's contributions, JUSE established the in 1951 as the nation's highest award for quality achievement, initially for individuals and later expanded to organizations, fostering widespread implementation of SQC across Japanese industries. Concurrently, , another American quality pioneer, applied the —originally an economic observation by —to during the late 1940s and early 1950s. Juran, who visited in 1954 to consult on quality strategies, adapted the 80/20 rule to argue that approximately 80% of quality problems stemmed from 20% of the causes, often related to a few critical defects or processes. This insight, detailed in his influential 1951 book Quality Control Handbook, encouraged managers to prioritize the "vital few" causes for targeted interventions, influencing Japanese firms to focus resources efficiently on high-impact areas like supplier reliability and design flaws. By the 1960s, Japan's quality evolution deepened with the emergence of quality circles, small voluntary groups of frontline workers who met regularly to identify and solve production issues. Proposed by in 1962 as part of his advocacy for , these circles empowered employees to contribute ideas, aligning with the philosophy of continuous, incremental improvement. Ishikawa's approach, promoted through JUSE seminars and publications, spread rapidly; by the late 1970s, over one million quality circles operated in , driving innovations in areas like defect reduction and process efficiency while embedding a culture of collective problem-solving. The success of these Japanese practices prompted a significant response during the , amid a crisis in the automobile industry. U.S. automakers, such as Ford and , faced declining market share as Japanese vehicles gained reputation for superior reliability, with import penetration rising from 15% in 1970 to over 25% by 1980 due to lower defect rates and better . This "quality gap," highlighted in the 1980 NBC documentary If Can... Why Can't We?, spurred American firms to adopt Japanese methods, including SQC, circles, and just-in-time production, leading to initiatives like Ford's 1981 improvement program under CEO Donald Petersen. By the mid-, these adaptations helped narrow the disparity, with U.S. auto defect rates improving by up to 50% in some models through cross-company learning and consultant-led training.

Sector-Specific Perspectives

Manufacturing Sector

In the manufacturing sector, quality is fundamentally defined as the conformance of products to established design specifications and process requirements, ensuring that produced items meet predefined tolerances, control limits, and target yields. This concept emphasizes the effectiveness of design and functions in executing requirements without deviations that could compromise functionality or reliability. A key aspect of this approach is the pursuit of zero-defect goals in assembly lines, where the philosophy aims to eliminate errors entirely by preventing defects from occurring rather than merely identifying them , as pioneered by Philip Crosby's principles. Historically, has shifted from mass —where defects were detected through end-of-line checks on large batches—to proactive defect prevention via control, which integrates real-time monitoring and statistical tools to address issues at their source. This evolution reduces waste and enhances efficiency by building quality into the production itself, moving away from reactive to assurance methods like control charts and continuous improvement. In practice, this means focusing on upstream interventions, such as equipment calibration and operator training, to maintain conformance before defects propagate. A prominent example in the automotive industry is the (TPS), which integrates just-in-time () manufacturing to produce only what is needed, when needed, thereby minimizing inventory while ensuring high conformance to specifications through synchronized assembly of thousands of parts. TPS employs jidoka, or automation with a human touch, where production halts automatically upon detecting abnormalities to prevent defective units from advancing, fostering a culture of defect prevention and (continuous improvement). In the electronics sector, particularly semiconductor fabrication, quality manifests in yield rates—the percentage of functional integrated circuits produced on wafers—which directly measures conformance amid complex processes prone to defects from or variations. High yields, often targeted above 80%, are achieved through rigorous controls and defect inspection standards, underscoring the sector's emphasis on prevention to ensure reliability in applications like . Key metrics for assessing quality include (FPY), which calculates the of units passing quality checks on the initial run without rework—FPY = (good units / total units entering process) × 100—highlighting process efficiency and waste reduction. rates, defined as the of materials discarded due to failing standards—scrap rate = (scrapped material / total material) × 100—provide insight into material utilization and effectiveness, with lower rates indicating robust prevention strategies. Additionally, cycle time, the duration to complete one production unit, impacts quality by revealing inefficiencies; prolonged cycles often signal underlying defects or errors that extend rework, while optimized times through lean methods maintain conformance without compromising standards.

Service Sector

In the service sector, is primarily defined by the consistency of delivery and the degree of achieved, rather than adherence to physical product specifications. Unlike tangible goods, services emphasize experiential elements such as and reliability in interactions, where metrics like wait times in or error rates in banking directly influence perceptions of value. For instance, in banking, low error rates in contribute to trust and repeat usage, as supported by studies on dimensions. Service quality management faces unique challenges due to the inherent characteristics of services, including heterogeneity and perishability. Heterogeneity arises from variability in human interactions, making it difficult to standardize outputs across encounters, while perishability means services cannot be stored or inventoried, leading to potential mismatches between . These factors complicate , as managers must address fluctuating customer expectations and real-time delivery constraints without the buffer of production adjustments. Illustrative examples highlight these dynamics in specific industries. In healthcare, quality encompasses patient outcomes alongside operational metrics like wait times, where prolonged delays have been shown to negatively impact satisfaction and perceived care effectiveness. Similarly, in retail, customer experience metrics—such as ease of navigation and personalized assistance—drive loyalty, with effective service design correlating to higher retention rates. These cases underscore the shift from defect-free production to holistic experience optimization. A critical component of service quality is employee for service recovery, which involves structured handling of s to restore confidence. equips frontline staff with skills in , problem-solving, and to resolve issues swiftly, often turning negative experiences into opportunities for . indicates that organizations investing in such programs see improved resolution rates and overall satisfaction, as employees become adept at addressing variability on the spot.

Operations Management

In operations management, quality is integrated into supply chain processes by adopting a systems-based approach that aligns suppliers, manufacturers, and distributors to minimize defects and variations, thereby enhancing overall performance and . This integration involves supplier selection criteria that prioritize quality metrics, such as defect rates and compliance standards, alongside collaborative tools like (VMI) to ensure real-time quality monitoring and reduce stock discrepancies. In management, quality practices lower the need for excess by reducing defective units and shortening cycle times, allowing for more efficient capital allocation. incorporates quality from the outset through techniques like and , which embed customer requirements into workflows to prevent errors upstream. A key example of this integration is "quality at the source" in lean operations, where each worker is responsible for inspecting and correcting their own output immediately, preventing defects from propagating through the . This principle, rooted in error-proofing (), shifts from end-of-line inspections to proactive measures at every step, fostering a of accountability and reducing rework costs. By controlling quality at its origin, operations achieve zero-defect goals, as exemplified in Toyota's "genryū kanri" approach, which halts processes to address issues instantly. Operations quality objectives emphasize achieved through enhanced reliability, while balancing trade-offs with speed and flexibility to meet diverse customer demands. Reliability, or dependability, ensures consistent output and on-time delivery, directly lowering costs by minimizing and claims—for instance, high dependability can lead to significant reductions in operational expenses in settings. However, operations must balance this with speed, which accelerates throughput but risks quality lapses if not managed, and flexibility, which allows rapid adaptation to volume or product changes without compromising standards. These objectives form a where underpins the others, as poor quality amplifies costs across speed and flexibility dimensions. The APICS (now ASCM) Operations Management Body of Knowledge (OMBOK) provides a comprehensive framework for embedding in , emphasizing its role as a core competitive priority in strategy formulation. In planning, OMBOK advocates for quality-driven supplier partnerships and risk mitigation to ensure seamless flows, while inventory planning uses accuracy targets (e.g., 99% in systems) to maintain quality without excess holding costs. Process design within OMBOK integrates (TQM) and to control variability, aligning operations with market needs through performance metrics like defect rates and conformance quality. This body of knowledge supports cross-functional , such as (S&OP), where quality indicators inform and . A notable case illustrating operations-wide quality impacts is Boeing's 787 Dreamliner production challenges from 2019 onward, where inconsistencies in join points and composite gap management led to widespread defects. These issues stemmed from variations in fit-up forces, halting deliveries from October 2020 to August 2022 and slowing production rates, which disrupted global supply chains, delayed airline fleets, and incurred billions in costs. The problems highlighted how localized quality failures cascade across operations, affecting inventory buildup, supplier relations, and overall reliability objectives, ultimately requiring FAA-mandated inspections and process verifications to resume operations. Boeing's response included embedding join inspections into workflows and extensive (up to 165,000 cycles), underscoring the need for holistic integration to prevent enterprise-level disruptions.

Cultural and Regional Variations

Cultural and regional variations in business quality practices are profoundly shaped by societal values, historical contexts, and economic priorities, leading to distinct approaches that influence how organizations implement . In , the emphasis on collective harmony and incremental progress has given rise to influential concepts like , a philosophy of continuous small improvements involving all employees, which was popularized globally in the 1980s through Masaaki Imai's seminal book Kaizen: The Key to Japan's Competitive Success. Similarly, Poka-Yoke, or error-proofing devices designed to prevent defects at the source, originated in the 1960s under as part of the and gained widespread recognition in the 1980s for its role in achieving . These Japanese methods reflect a cultural focus on long-term process refinement and employee involvement, contrasting with more individualistic Western approaches. In , quality management is heavily oriented toward , driven by stringent EU directives that prioritize safety, environmental standards, and harmonized certifications such as the Medical Device Regulation (MDR), which mandates risk-based quality systems to ensure product conformity across member states. This emphasis stems from cultural traits like high in many European nations, where formalized rules and oversight mitigate risks in diverse markets. For instance, the European Medicines Agency's quality policy integrates compliance with statutory requirements as a core pillar of organizational quality systems. Emerging markets like and often grapple with cost-quality trade-offs, where rapid industrialization and competitive pressures lead firms to balance affordability with rising quality expectations amid global supply chains. In the early , Chinese manufacturing companies adopted practices such as but at levels below Western standards, focusing on cost efficiency while incrementally improving to meet international demands. More recently, as of 2024, has pursued initiatives like "new quality productive forces" to elevate standards through technology-led growth and alignment with international benchmarks. In , orders (QCOs) have been implemented to enforce minimum standards on imports, particularly from , addressing substandard goods while navigating economic constraints that prioritize low-cost production. However, in November 2025, the government withdrew several QCOs, including 14 covering chemicals, plastics, and textiles, to ease industry burdens and improve ease of doing . These regions exhibit growing awareness of modern tools, yet implementation lags due to resource limitations and market dynamics. Cultural dimensions, particularly collectivism versus , significantly affect quality practices; collectivist societies in , such as and , foster team-based initiatives and higher commitment to continuous improvement programs like , with surveys indicating stronger adoption in collectivist cultures compared to individualist ones. In contrast, individualist cultures like the emphasize personal accountability and structural investments in quality infrastructure, such as advanced equipment, over group-oriented efforts, leading to standardized but less collaborative approaches. This dichotomy influences , with collectivists prioritizing group harmony in quality teams and individualists focusing on autonomous performance metrics. The global diffusion of Japanese quality methods accelerated post-1980s, as Western firms adopted lean production, just-in-time inventory, and quality-control techniques to counter Japan's competitive edge in automobiles and , with innovations like and Poka-Yoke integrated into international standards by the . This spread was facilitated by multinational collaborations and benchmarking, enabling adaptations in diverse cultural contexts while retaining core principles of waste reduction and defect prevention.

Quality Management Approaches

Total Quality Management (TQM)

Total Quality Management (TQM) represents a comprehensive that embeds quality principles into every organizational process, aiming for sustained success through and continuous improvement. It views quality not as an isolated function but as a strategic imperative involving all employees, from leadership to frontline workers, to foster a culture of excellence. Unlike traditional , TQM shifts focus from detecting defects to preventing them by optimizing systems and processes holistically. This approach gained prominence in the mid-20th century, drawing from the foundational work of quality pioneers like and Joseph Juran, whose ideas helped transform Japanese industry and later influenced Western practices. At the heart of TQM are its eight core principles, which provide a framework for organizational transformation. Customer focus prioritizes understanding and exceeding customer expectations to drive loyalty and value creation. Total employee involvement empowers all staff through training and participation, recognizing that quality improvements stem from collective input rather than top-down directives. The process-centered approach treats operations as interconnected systems to be managed for efficiency and consistency, minimizing variation. An integrated system ensures alignment across departments, suppliers, and stakeholders toward unified quality objectives. A strategic and systematic approach links quality management to long-term organizational goals. Continual improvement commits to ongoing enhancements in processes, products, and services. Fact-based decision making relies on data analysis for informed choices. Effective communications fosters a quality culture through clear collaboration. These principles are vividly illustrated in Deming's 14 points, introduced in his seminal 1986 book Out of the Crisis, which advocate for constancy of purpose, leadership, breaking down barriers, and eliminating fear to build a quality-oriented culture. For instance, points like "improve constantly and forever the system of production and service" and "institute leadership" underscore the need for ongoing enhancement and supportive management. Central to TQM's operational framework is the (Plan-Do-Check-Act), an iterative method for driving continuous improvement. In the Plan phase, organizations identify opportunities, set objectives, and develop action plans based on data. The Do phase involves small-scale implementation to test changes. Check evaluates outcomes against expectations, using analysis to identify variances. Finally, Act standardizes successful changes or refines the plan for another cycle. Attributed to Deming (though rooted in Walter Shewhart's work), PDCA serves as TQM's foundational tool for problem-solving and adaptation, enabling incremental progress without disrupting operations. Successful TQM implementation hinges on deliberate steps to embed these principles organization-wide. Leadership commitment is paramount, with executives modeling behaviors, allocating resources, and communicating a clear quality vision to align the entire workforce. Fact-based decision making relies on objective —often through metrics and feedback loops—to guide strategies, avoiding reliance on alone. Supplier partnerships extend quality standards upstream by collaborating with vendors for reliable inputs, fostering mutual improvement and reducing defects at the source. These steps require phased rollout, starting with pilot programs to build momentum. The benefits of TQM manifest as a profound cultural shift toward long-term excellence, yielding enhanced efficiency, reduced costs, and stronger customer relationships, though it demands patience amid initial hurdles like employee resistance and resource demands. A notable example is 's adoption of TQM in the 1980s, when the company faced a 65% loss to Japanese competitors offering superior copiers. By consolidating suppliers from 5,000 to 500, processes, and empowering employees, cut manufacturing costs by 50%, reduced quality problems by two-thirds, and regained profitability—culminating in the 1989 . However, challenges included overcoming internal skepticism and the steep learning curve of shifting from price-based to quality-driven competition, highlighting TQM's need for sustained commitment.

Six Sigma and Lean Methodologies

Six Sigma is a data-driven methodology aimed at improving business processes by reducing variability and defects, originating from in 1986 where engineer Bill Smith developed it as a strategy to enhance quality and profitability. The core framework, known as , structures projects into five phases: Define the problem and goals, Measure key process aspects, Analyze data to identify root causes, Improve by implementing solutions, and Control to sustain gains. This approach emphasizes statistical analysis to achieve near-perfect performance, with the ultimate goal of a defect rate of no more than 3.4 defects per million opportunities at the six-sigma level. Lean methodologies, rooted in the developed in the 1950s by , focus on eliminating waste—termed muda—to streamline operations and deliver value to customers more efficiently. Muda encompasses seven categories of non-value-adding activities, such as , waiting, and excess , which are targeted for removal to optimize flow. A key tool in Lean is , which visually diagrams the flow of materials and information to highlight waste and opportunities for continuous improvement. While pioneered at post-World War II, Lean's principles gained widespread business adoption in the following the publication of The Machine That Changed the World, which popularized the term "Lean" and contrasted it with traditional . The integration of Lean and , often called , combines Lean's waste-reduction speed with Six Sigma's precision in variation control, enabling holistic process enhancements across industries. In healthcare, for instance, has been applied using the framework to reduce patient wait times; a study in a private hospital implemented improvements and dedicated clinic slots, cutting trauma orthopedic wait times by 34% from 17.6 to 11.6 days while increasing consultant capacity by 22%. This synergy addresses both efficiency and quality, fostering faster cycle times without compromising defect prevention. Metrics in these methodologies quantify performance, with sigma levels representing process capability from one sigma (about 690,000 defects per million opportunities) to six sigma (3.4 defects per million opportunities), where higher levels indicate superior consistency under a 1.5 sigma shift allowance for long-term variation. The process capability index (Cpk) further assesses how well a process meets specification limits, calculated as: Cpk=min⁡(USL−μ3σ,μ−LSL3σ)Cpk = \min\left(\frac{USL - \mu}{3\sigma}, \frac{\mu - LSL}{3\sigma}\right) where USL is the upper specification limit, LSL is the lower specification limit, μ\mu is the process mean, and σ\sigma is the standard deviation; a Cpk of 2.0 aligns with six-sigma goals. These measures provide objective benchmarks for defect reduction and waste elimination, guiding data-backed decisions.

Standards and Certifications

ISO 9000 Family of Standards

The ISO 9000 family of standards provides a comprehensive framework for systems (QMS), with ISO 9001 serving as the core standard specifying requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining, and continually improving a QMS. First published in 1987 by the (ISO), ISO 9001 emphasizes a process approach to , where organizations identify, manage, and improve interconnected processes to achieve consistent results that meet and regulatory requirements. The 2015 revision aligned the standard more closely with modern business practices, introducing risk-based thinking to proactively address potential issues and opportunities, while promoting continual improvement through the cycle. A revised version of ISO 9001 is expected to be published in September 2026. Key elements of ISO 9001:2015 are structured into seven main clauses that form the foundation of an effective QMS:
  • Context of the organization: Understanding internal and external factors influencing the QMS.
  • : Top management commitment to the QMS, including policy establishment and integration into business processes.
  • Planning: Addressing risks and opportunities, setting quality objectives, and planning changes.
  • Support: Providing necessary resources, competence, awareness, communication, and documented information.
  • Operation: Planning and controlling processes to meet requirements for products and services.
  • Performance evaluation: Monitoring, , , internal audits, and reviews.
  • : Nonconformity handling, corrective actions, and continual enhancement of the QMS.
These elements ensure that quality is embedded throughout the organization, fostering and . Certification to ISO 9001 involves third-party audits conducted by accredited certification bodies, which assess an organization's compliance with the standard's requirements through stage 1 (document review) and stage 2 (on-site audit) processes, followed by ongoing surveillance audits and recertification every three years. Benefits include enhanced , as many customers and regulators require or prefer certified suppliers; improved internal processes leading to cost reductions and higher ; and a competitive edge in global trade. As of 2023, over one million organizations worldwide held valid ISO 9001 certifications, demonstrating its widespread adoption across industries and countries. In 2024, ISO 9001 received Amendment 1, which incorporates changes by requiring organizations to consider climate change impacts in their environmental conditions and risk assessments, building on the risk-based thinking already emphasized in the 2015 version. This update aligns the standard with broader goals, ensuring QMS addresses environmental responsibilities alongside quality objectives.

Other Global Quality Standards

In addition to the foundational ISO 9000 family, several specialized standards extend principles to specific industries and emerging areas, ensuring tailored compliance with sector-specific risks and requirements. The IATF 16949:2016 standard, developed by the (IATF), establishes requirements for the global automotive , building directly on ISO 9001 while emphasizing defect prevention, variation reduction, and waste elimination to enhance . This standard mandates core tools such as and production part approval processes, making certification essential for suppliers to major automakers worldwide. For the medical devices sector, :2016 specifies requirements for systems focused on , design, development, production, and servicing of medical devices, with a strong emphasis on to ensure product and . Originally published in 2003 and revised in 2016 to align with ISO 9001:2015, it requires organizations to maintain documented procedures for validation of processes where output cannot be fully verified by subsequent monitoring. This standard supports and post-market , critical for mitigating health risks in device . ISO 14000, introduced in 1996 as a family of environmental standards, integrates principles with by providing frameworks for organizations to manage environmental responsibilities systematically, including pollution prevention and continual improvement of environmental performance. The core standard, ISO 14001:2015, outlines requirements for an that identifies significant environmental aspects and sets objectives to reduce impacts like resource consumption and emissions. By linking to ecological outcomes, it enables businesses to achieve compliance with environmental regulations while enhancing overall . In the aerospace industry, AS9100D (first published in 1999 and revised in 2016) defines quality management system requirements for , , and defense organizations, extending ISO 9001 with additional controls for safety, , and counterfeit part prevention to address the sector's high-stakes reliability needs. Developed by the International Aerospace Quality Group (IAQG), it requires risk-based thinking and , ensuring rigorous oversight throughout the from design to delivery. Emerging standards like ISO/IEC 25010:2011 address digital quality in software and by defining a product quality model with eight characteristics—such as functional suitability, performance efficiency, compatibility, , reliability, , , and portability—to evaluate and improve software products throughout their lifecycle. Updated in 2023 to include modern aspects like ICT product quality, this standard provides measurable attributes and sub-characteristics for assessing software against user and stakeholder needs in an increasingly digital environment. It supports quality evaluation without prescribing specific methods, allowing flexibility for processes.

Tools and Techniques

Statistical Process Control (SPC)

is a statistical method used in to monitor, control, and improve processes by distinguishing between inherent process variation and unusual deviations that indicate problems. Introduced by in his 1931 book Economic Control of Quality of Manufactured Product, SPC relies on control charts to plot process data over time, enabling early detection of shifts or trends that could affect product quality. This approach helps organizations maintain stable processes, reduce defects, and enhance efficiency by focusing interventions on actionable issues rather than random fluctuations. At its core, SPC differentiates between common cause variation—random, unavoidable fluctuations inherent to the process—and special cause variation, which stems from identifiable external factors like equipment failure or operator error. Shewhart's control charts, such as the X-bar chart for monitoring process means and the R-chart for tracking variability within subgroups, plot sample statistics against time to visualize these variations. Points falling within control limits suggest a stable process dominated by common causes, while outliers signal special causes requiring investigation. Control limits are typically set at three standard deviations from the process mean, calculated as: UCL=μ+3σ,LCL=μ−3σ\text{UCL} = \mu + 3\sigma, \quad \text{LCL} = \mu - 3\sigma where μ\mu is the process mean and σ\sigma is the standard deviation; these limits encompass approximately 99.73% of data under a stable process. Process capability, a key SPC metric, assesses how well a process meets specification limits, with the index CpC_p defined as: Cp=USL−LSL6σC_p = \frac{\text{USL} - \text{LSL}}{6\sigma} where USL and LSL are the upper and lower specification limits; a Cp>1C_p > 1 indicates the process can produce output within specs under normal conditions. Implementing SPC begins with systematic data collection through rational subgrouping, where samples (e.g., 4-5 measurements per subgroup) are taken at regular intervals to capture both within- and between-subgroup variation. Charting software such as or JMP automates the plotting and limit calculations, facilitating real-time monitoring. A practical example is in beverage bottling plants, where X-bar and R-charts track fill levels to ensure consistency; if a subgroup average exceeds the upper control limit, it may indicate a malfunctioning filler head, prompting immediate adjustments to prevent under- or over-filling. This application has been shown to reduce variation in fill volumes, improving compliance with regulatory standards and minimizing waste. Despite its effectiveness, SPC has limitations, including its assumption of normally distributed for the probabilistic interpretation of three-sigma limits to hold accurately; non-normal distributions can lead to false alarms or missed signals. Additionally, it is less suitable for short-run processes, where limited production volumes yield insufficient for reliable control limit estimation, necessitating alternative techniques like standardized charts.

Continuous Improvement Tools

Continuous improvement tools in business quality management encompass practical, team-oriented methods designed to foster ongoing enhancements in processes, products, and services. These tools emphasize collaborative problem-solving and incremental changes, often integrated into broader frameworks like the from . By focusing on root causes and best practices, they enable organizations to achieve sustained performance gains without relying solely on quantitative monitoring. Kaizen events, also known as blitzes, are intensive, short-term workshops typically lasting three to five days, where cross-functional teams convene to analyze and refine specific processes. Participants map current workflows, identify inefficiencies, brainstorm solutions, and implement immediate tweaks, such as streamlining steps to reduce cycle time. This approach promotes and rapid results, with benefits including enhanced and tangible proof of improvements in areas like production . The , or , serves as a visual tool for root cause analysis, structuring potential problem contributors into categories like methods, materials, machines, , , and environment—often abbreviated as the 6Ms. Developed by Japanese engineer in the , it resembles a fish , with the "head" representing (e.g., product defects) and "bones" branching out to causes. Teams use it collaboratively to brainstorm and prioritize factors, facilitating targeted interventions; for instance, in , it might reveal inadequate as a primary driver of assembly errors. The 5 Whys technique is a straightforward, iterative questioning method for uncovering underlying issues in problem-solving, where analysts repeatedly ask "why" up to five times to drill down from symptoms to root causes. Originating in the from at Corporation, it was refined for improvement in automotive production to prevent recurrence of defects. In practice, a team might start with a machine breakdown, ask why it occurred (e.g., due to overheating), then why that happened (poor lubrication), and continue until revealing a systemic flaw like insufficient schedules, enabling precise corrective actions. Benchmarking involves systematically comparing an organization's processes, performance metrics, and practices against those of industry leaders or best-in-class entities to identify gaps and adopt superior methods. This tool drives by highlighting opportunities for emulation, such as evaluating against competitors to shorten delivery times. In the 1990s, (GE) notably adopted within its quality initiatives, including the Work-Out program and rollout, which inspired comparisons to Motorola's processes and contributed to over $10 billion in savings through enhanced efficiency and defect reduction.

Quality Awards and Recognition

Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award

The was established in 1987 through 100-107, signed by President , to promote American competitiveness by recognizing organizations that demonstrate superior quality and performance excellence. Administered by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) under the U.S. Department of Commerce, the award honors achievements in , , and operational effectiveness, serving as a benchmark for organizational improvement across , service, , healthcare, and nonprofit sectors. The program's framework aligns with principles by emphasizing customer focus, data-driven decision-making, and continuous enhancement. The award's evaluation criteria are structured around seven core categories: , , customers, , analysis, and , , operations, and results, with a maximum score of 1,000 points allocated across these areas to assess an organization's systems, processes, and outcomes. evaluates senior executives' roles in governance and ethical practices; examines planning and resource alignment; customers focuses on satisfaction and ; covers performance ; addresses employee development and ; operations reviews work systems and efficiency; and results quantifies achievements in key areas like financial and societal contributions, for 450 points to prioritize tangible impacts. Applicants undergo a rigorous review process, including document submission, site visits for finalists, and scoring that rewards approaches approaching world-class standards. Notable early recipients include in 1988, recognized for its pioneering quality initiative that reduced defects and boosted , and in 1992, honored for exceptional systems that enhanced guest and operational consistency. Recent recipients as of 2025 include the Alamo Colleges District, which received the for the second time in 2024. Studies show that applying for the , even without winning, drives significant performance gains; for instance, Baldrige applicants in healthcare outperformed non-applicants in operational metrics like satisfaction and , with recipients demonstrating up to 63% job growth compared to industry peers. The process fosters self-assessment and ic improvements, yielding an estimated 820:1 for the U.S. through enhanced and . The Baldrige Award has exerted considerable global influence, inspiring similar national programs in , such as the European Foundation for Quality (EFQM) Excellence Award, and in , including Singapore's National Quality Award and India's Rajiv Gandhi National Quality Award, which adapt its criteria to local contexts while promoting performance excellence frameworks worldwide. Over 100 countries have established quality awards modeled on Baldrige principles, facilitating the dissemination of best practices and elevating international standards in organizational .

Deming Prize and Similar Awards

The , established in 1951 by the Japanese Union of Scientists and Engineers (JUSE), honors outstanding achievements in (TQM) and commemorates the contributions of to Japan's post-war efforts. Initially focused on statistical , the award evolved to recognize organization-wide TQM , with the first ceremony held on September 22, 1951. It includes categories such as the for organizations demonstrating effective TQM practices, the Deming Grand Prize for those achieving exceptional excellence three or more years after winning the , and separate recognitions for individuals and overseas companies, with applications for overseas entities accepted since 1985. The first U.S. winner was Company in 1989, marking a significant milestone as the inaugural non-Japanese recipient and highlighting the prize's growing international influence. The prize's criteria emphasize three core areas: clear, customer-oriented objectives aligned with philosophy and ; effective, consistent utilization of TQM methods across the ; and demonstrable effects of TQM on achieving objectives and enhancing future growth capabilities, with each area requiring at least 70 points out of 100 for eligibility. Central to these criteria is the application of statistical methods as an integral part of TQM processes, though not mandatory, to support scientific and variation reduction. Company-wide quality control is required, involving all organizational functions—from to and production—through integrated cross-functional systems and the (Plan-Do-Check-Act) cycle to foster continuous improvement. Applicants must undergo a rigorous process, submitting a Description of TQM Practices (DTQMP) document for initial review, followed by document examinations and on-site audits by expert examiners to verify implementation depth and consistency. Comparable awards include the EFQM Excellence Award, formerly known as the European Quality Award, established in 1992 by the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) to promote organizational competitiveness through a holistic excellence model that assesses leadership, strategy, and results across European companies. Another similar recognition is the Japan Quality Award, created in 1996 by the Japan Quality Council under the Japan Productivity Center, aimed at honoring companies with superior management practices and productivity enhancements, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises. In the 2020s, the has continued to evolve, with its 2025 application guide incorporating broader elements, such as environmental , into TQM objectives to address contemporary global challenges like long-term profitability and stakeholder satisfaction. Recent 2025 recipients include Tata AutoComp Hendrickson Suspensions Ltd. and Global Indian International School . While the judging process, including on-site examinations, provides detailed insights, some observers note potential subjectivity in qualitative assessments of TQM maturity, though the structured scoring system mitigates this by focusing on verifiable practices and outcomes.

References

  1. https://www.iso.org/quality-management
  2. https://asq.org/quality-resources/quality-assurance-vs-control
  3. https://www.iso.org/quality-management/what-is-qms
  4. https://asq.org/quality-resources/history-of-quality
  5. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2464836/
  6. https://asq.org/quality-resources/total-quality-management
  7. https://www.iso.org/iso/pub100080.pdf
  8. https://asq.org/quality-resources/iso-9001
  9. https://www.iso.org/quality-management/principles
  10. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK557505/
  11. https://www.qualitymag.com/articles/98204-quality-and-requirements-get-the-full-story
  12. https://www.dau.edu/acquipedia-article/quality
  13. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14783363.2020.1844564
  14. https://www.juran.com/blog/features-of-quality-definition-of-quality-excellence/
  15. https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/53946
  16. https://asq.org/quality-resources/more-on-quality-quotes
  17. https://eh.net/encyclopedia/medieval-guilds/
  18. https://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/pds/gilded/progress/text3/taylor.pdf
  19. https://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pmc/section1/pmc11.htm
  20. https://www.astm.org/about/history
  21. https://deming.org/speech-by-dr-deming-to-japanese-business-leaders-in-1950/
  22. https://www.juse.or.jp/deming_en/award/01.html
  23. https://www.juran.com/blog/a-guide-to-the-pareto-principle-80-20-rule-pareto-analysis/
  24. https://asq.org/about-asq/honorary-members/ishikawa
  25. https://www.qualitydigest.com/static/magazine/dec/juran-2.html
  26. https://www.csmonitor.com/1983/0616/061639.html
  27. https://www.dau.edu/glossary/quality-conformance
  28. https://safetyculture.com/topics/zero-defects
  29. https://www.machinemetrics.com/blog/quality-control-in-manufacturing
  30. https://global.toyota/en/company/vision-and-philosophy/production-system/
  31. https://irds.ieee.org/images/files/pdf/2023/2023IRDS_YE.pdf
  32. https://www.mrpeasy.com/blog/first-pass-yield/
  33. https://www.netsuite.com/portal/resource/articles/accounting/scrap-rate-calculation.shtml
  34. https://www.mrpeasy.com/blog/cycle-time/
  35. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6843569/
  36. https://jatran.jacksonms.gov/Resources/JXyRTi/8OK150/DeliveringQualityServiceBalancingCustomerPerceptionsAndExpectations.pdf
  37. https://ecommons.cornell.edu/bitstreams/73edca53-198d-4f45-ac11-acb2ae3c81a6/download
  38. https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/47924/frameworkforanal00bitr.pdf%3Bsequence=1
  39. https://repository.usfca.edu/context/at/article/1020/viewcontent/JITTA_2012___Challenges_for_Service_Science.pdf
  40. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6614942/
  41. https://digitalcommons.harrisburgu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=hcms_dandt
  42. https://ecommons.cornell.edu/bitstream/1813/72301/1/Verma25_The_impact_of_service_system_design.pdf
  43. https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1037&context=jamt
  44. https://minds.wisconsin.edu/bitstream/handle/1793/42747/2008lanc.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
  45. https://hospitalityinsights.ehl.edu/resources/all-resources/service-recovery-matrix
  46. https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/17143
  47. https://shingo.org/a-look-at-assure-quality-at-the-source/
  48. https://www.planettogether.com/aps-trends/objectives-of-operational-performance
  49. https://www.apics.org/docs/default-source/industry-content/apics-ombok-framework.pdf?sfvrsn=c5fce1ba_2
  50. https://www.boeing.com/commercial/787/quality-info
  51. https://maaw.info/ArticleSummaries/ArtSumImaiKaizen1986.htm
  52. https://www.toolshero.com/quality-management/poka-yoke/
  53. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290716496_Quality_Management_in_Japan_-_What_makes_it_so_special
  54. https://simplerqms.com/eu-mdr-quality-management-system/
  55. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235292484_Quality_management_A_cross-cultural_perspective
  56. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/other/policy-1-quality-management-policy_en.pdf
  57. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280062672_An_in-depth_investigation_on_quality_management_practices_in_China
  58. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/unleashing-new-quality-productive-forces-chinas-strategy-for-technology-led-growth/
  59. https://m.economictimes.com/news/company/corporate-trends/quality-control-orders-qco-burden-india-may-ease-a-key-irritant-for-companies/articleshow/125217568.cms
  60. https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/business/govt-withdraws-14-bis-quality-control-orders-a-landmark-step-for-industry-and-ease-of-doing-business/
  61. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1016/j.jom.2009.11.002
  62. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1413504/FULLTEXT01.pdf
  63. https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262541152/out-of-the-crisis/
  64. https://deming.org/explore/fourteen-points/
  65. https://asq.org/quality-resources/pdca-cycle
  66. https://deming.org/explore/pdsa/
  67. https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/management/total-quality-management-tqm/
  68. https://www.isixsigma.com/total-quality-management-tqm/introduction-and-implementation-total-quality-management-tqm/
  69. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318642328_TQM_and_Process_Improvement_in_Xerox_and_Toyota
  70. https://ivypanda.com/essays/total-quality-management-xerox/
  71. https://asq.org/quality-resources/six-sigma
  72. https://www.academia.edu/23671096/An_Overview_of_Six_Sigma
  73. https://oldsite.nnu.edu/browse/EAeOI9/0S9012/TaiichiOhnoToyotaProductionSystem.pdf
  74. http://faculty.up.edu/lulay/me403/Lean.pdf
  75. https://www.epa.gov/sustainability/environmental-professionals-guide-lean-and-six-sigma-chapter-2
  76. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3678835/
  77. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10572702/
  78. https://asq.org/quality-resources/quality-glossary/c
  79. https://www.iso.org/standards/popular/iso-9000-family
  80. https://www.iso.org/standard/62085.html
  81. https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/store/en/PUB100369.pdf
  82. https://www.iso.org/certification.html
  83. https://www.iso.org/the-iso-survey.html
  84. https://www.iso.org/standard/88431.html
  85. https://www.intertek.com/blog/2024/11-22-new-climate-considerations-in-iso-standards/
  86. https://www.iatfglobaloversight.org/iatf-169492016/about/
  87. https://www.iso.org/standard/59752.html
  88. https://www.iso.org/standards/popular/iso-14000-family
  89. https://www.iso.org/standard/60857.html
  90. https://iaqg.org/standard/9100-qms-requirements-for-aviation-space-and-defense-organizations/
  91. https://www.iso.org/standard/35733.html
  92. https://www.iso.org/standard/78176.html
  93. https://www.spcpress.com/pdf/DJW088.pdf
  94. https://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pmc/section3/pmc321.htm
  95. https://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pmc/section1/pmc16.htm
  96. https://info.minitab.com/hubfs/UseCase-BottlingPlantQI.pdf?hsLang=en
  97. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327975776_Implementation_of_statistical_process_control_in_a_bottling_line_in_winery_industry
  98. https://asq.org/quality-resources/articles/some-perspectives-on-nonparametric-statistical-process-control
  99. https://www.isixsigma.com/control-charts/short-run-statistical-process-control-techniques/
  100. https://asq.org/quality-progress/articles/make-the-leap
  101. https://asq.org/quality-resources/fishbone
  102. https://jmedicalcasereports.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1752-1947-5-120
  103. https://asq.org/quality-resources/five-whys
  104. https://www.qualitydigest.com/static/magazine/feb/bench.html
  105. https://www.6sigma.us/ge/six-sigma-case-study-general-electric/
  106. https://www.nist.gov/baldrige/malcolm-baldrige-national-quality-improvement-act-1987
  107. https://www.nist.gov/baldrige/baldrige-award
  108. https://www.nist.gov/baldrige/about-baldrige-excellence-framework
  109. https://www.nist.gov/baldrige/baldrige-award/award-criteria
  110. https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2017/10/11/1988_Motorola_Inc.pdf
  111. https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2017/10/11/1992_The_Ritz-Carlton_Hotel_Company.pdf
  112. https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2025/04/congratulations-2024-baldrige-award-recipients
  113. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35802928/
  114. https://www.nist.gov/baldrige/how-baldrige-works/about-baldrige/baldrige-impacts
  115. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272696305001464
  116. https://www.juse.or.jp/deming_en/download/DP_App_Guide_ENG_2025v2.pdf
  117. https://efqm.org/our-history/
  118. https://jpc.jpc-net.jp/eng/about/history.html
  119. https://www.ndtv.com/auto/tata-autocomps-thsl-wins-deming-prize-third-award-in-two-years-9648267
  120. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DQ-nqHBAU0U/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.