Hi Walter,
>
>>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.
>
>In fact I think this law is true. Delivering more quality than needed generally increases production costs. Therefore you can lose your market-share because you're too expensive. In fact, by delevering too much quality could be like digging your own grave.

No, I disagree. As stated in my other post, by definition, quality is conformance to requirements, nothing more. Any other definition is subjective. The product either does what it's supposed to or it doesn't. As a matter of fact, there was a book on the subject of quality within the last 15 years. It's title is: "Quality is free". By failing to produce a product that meets the requirements, you increase your cost, not lower it.

>Your company is an exception to the general rule, i think.

Many large companies in the U.S. have adopted this policy. So we're not the exception.