Quote:
Originally Posted by PraiseCaster
As a Quality Supervisor in the manufacturing arena, it boils down to this:
The right parts (within acceptable tolerances), through the right process (repeatable results), acceptable testing (proven results), meeting or exceeding the customers requirements (the goal).
|
this is actually an anachronistic definition of Quality though. I'm pretty well versed in Deming's work... but his Quality is almost a brand rather than what conceptually most folks think of as quality. If you work in the field of quality control that is a completely different vision of what quality is although they do share some qualities... if that makes sense.
Deming's sense of quality could result in a commodity that was not quality so long as the requirements were set in a manner that would render that result..
We've been mixing terms pretty significantly in this thread... but, before we head down the Deming path (I'm a fan) lets just make sure that knowledge of Deming and 3.65 will get you a very average cup of coffee.
The whole "Deming would spin in his grave" stuff is not that valuable. First, Deming wouldn't spin in his grave if folks were kicking the tires about quality, he'd be pleased that a process had begun. Second, again, the concept of quality is loosely related to Deming but Deming would be the first to delineate that he is talking about processes etc not an intellectual concept of quality.