Hi Andrew,

>>>4. Too much Quality can ruin you
>>
>>This is absolute nonsense! I'm going to seriously consider selling the stock I own in the company. How can you have "Too much Quality"? I doubt if the man even knows the definition of "quality". Quality is simply conformance to requirements. Period. End of story. You cause quality to happen by doing things right the first time. Producing quality products and services is actually cheaper than doing otherwise. The company I work for produces carpet. We are the largest manufacturer in the world. We consistently are the low price leader, while at the same time the leader in quality. If Damier-Benz/Chrysler held as much of the market as we do, they'd easily have to sell 10 times the number of cars that they do. This is utter rubish.
>
>As far as the automotive industry (and I'm sure MANY others), quality is a fine line that they have to walk. If 'quality' is simply your statement "Quality is simply conformance o requirements." then I completely agree. There can't be too much quality!

What other definition of quality could you apply that isn't subjective? All too often, quality is equated with either the cost of the product or the extra features or luxuries it has. This would mean that you'd couldn't have a "quality" economy car. However, this isn't the case.

>The fact is that the REQUIREMENTS (read: specifications) on the parts in the automotive industry have preset lives that have nothing to do with what *could* be achieved. IOW: That brake-pad *could* last 10 times (just a guess here) longer than it does. It's simply that that brake-pad has been MADE (and designed) to last only 50,000 miles (again, a guess here). To me, that's bad quality. I want it the best it *could* be (at a given price) and not what they have preset the life of it to be.

Let me give you a better example. I owned a Chrysler mini-van. It had a 7 year 70,000 mile warranty on the power train (transmission). From personal experience, a reasonable expectation would probably be that the transmission should last at least twice that long, or 140,000 miles. My wife is the driver, and a home health nurse. She puts a lot of mileage on our vehicles. Most of these miles, however, are highway miles and less taxing on the transmission than city miles. Not only did the original transmission fail to reach 70,000, but the replacement (installed by the Chrysler dealer and using Chrysler parts under warranty) failed to last that long as well. Since it was under warranty, this was an additional cost to Chrysler. By failing to live up to their own requirements, they incurred an additional cost. When the replacement failed as well, they lost a customer. This cost them as well, since not only won't I be purchasing another vehicle from them, but my sharing of this experience may cause others to purchase other makes.


>So, quality *can* be bad (in my sense of the term) because you could build that brake-pad to last 1 million miles (guessing!) and sell four brake-pads to every car on earth JUST ONCE because it was SOOOO good. OR you could sell that brake-pad (with the preset life of 50,000 miles) to only 1/4 of cars on earth 20 TIMES. So, in this case, quality (my meaning) does hurt.

But that's not what I'm talking about< g >. There are four absolutes of quality. They are:

1. Definition: Quality is conformance to requirements.

2. System: Prevention is the way to achieve quality.

3. Performance Standard: Zero defects is the attitude needed for quality improvement.

4. Measurement: Measurement shows us how much time and money we waste when do not meet the requirements.