Points to Ponder:
Be a yardstick of quality. Some people aren't used to an environment where excellence is expected. (Who said this? Hint: a well-known CEO and incredible "Out of the Box" person)
Story Line:
“Do we need more Quality?” The answer to this question is in another question
“What are your customers’ performance expectations for your products or service?” Realistically, when do people say that something is not good quality (company, person or a product)? It is when one fails to meet the expectations of the other party.
“Are we doing too much Quality?”
The answer to this second question is in having clear understanding and alignment (LEAN principle) of what Quality means, who owns it, and then ponder “Are we producing quality (performance) in most effective way?” This is the real question people want to ask but some how end up questioning the end instead of means, and waste time in UnLEAN discussions and presentations.
So ... if Quality means meeting performance expectations/commitments in any relationship (Product, Service, and Personal) then bold statements such as “My business is different. It is low cost. We can’t live with quality” or, “We are in very cost constrained environment and we need to de-prioritize Quality” sound not only funny (a feast for the cartoonist), but also results in increasing the total cost to the business. Is there a business or relationship where it is OK not to deliver expected performance or not to meet commitments?”
Once it is clear that Quality means delivering on performance expectations for a product, service or relationship, then looking for the answer to the question “Can we produce same quality (a.k.a same performance) at a lower cost?” becomes easier (the LEAN way).
So who and what things are involved in producing the performance? Here is where Deming’s famous statement “Quality is everyone’s responsibility” becomes very relevant. If it is Product or Service Quality, the entire company and its resources contribute in one way or the other to the cost that produces quality (performance). So the company’s entire infrastructure (Processes, Systems, Resource Utilization, and Materials etc) needs to be constantly scrutinized to reduce cost per performance/quality.
These are the primary reasons why the Total Quality Management program in late '80s and early '90s insisted on top-level ownership and commitment, as well as the involvement of the entire company.
For (self) Reflection: “Do we need more Quality?” “Are we doing too much Quality?”