注重质量管理

注重质量管理

 

质量管理表明，产品质量和服务质量的提高是企业持续竞争优势的重要基础。因此，质量是各公司在全球范围内大力推行的核心客户价值。根据戴明（1996）的高质量导致更高的生产率，这反过来又会导致长期的竞争优势。质量的提高导致成本降低，因为返工更少，错误更少，延误和对我和材料的使用更少。低成本，反过来，导致竞争优势。它需要一个显着的支出，发起和推动质量改进的公司，这些支出被列为质量成本。大型组织花费数百万美元实施和维持质量计划。一般认为，高质量意味着更高的成本，这是不正确的，如果工艺质量提高，使产品质量，但这样做的成本（林2008），在20世纪70年代，日本制造商成为强大的竞争对手，美国汽车制造商。W.爱德华喜气洋洋，菲尔克罗斯比影响，约瑟夫M.杜兰LED在质量意识的变化，包括全面质量管理（TQM），其中质量应该是每个人的工作。根据Berry和超自然现象（1992）公司花费10-30%的销售收入质量成本。提高质量的同时，一些机构如施乐，摩托罗拉和通用汽车有自己的成本从30%降低到2%（销售监督等人。，2003）。

 

质量成本：

 

在这里定义质量成本和质量一样重要。不幸的是，这些定义不同于作者的作者。质量控制手册（杜，1951）是对质量成本概念的最早的文字。这标志着在质量成本领域的后续发展的开始。据杜兰（1989，p.376）不良质量成本的总和成本就会消失，如果没有质量问题，提出了一个比喻，质量差，其相关费用在矿井的黄金。质量成本通常被定义为以确保符合规范的产品和服务相关的所有支出（偷笑，1996）。质量成本是由一系列的活动，涉及多个部门，所有这些对产品/服务质量。

 

注重质量管理-Looking at Quality Management

 

Quality management suggests that improvement in quality of a product and service is an important basis for sustainable competitive advantage. Quality is therefore vigorously pursued by various companies across the globe as central customer value. According to Deming (1996) higher quality leads to higher productivity, which in turns leads to long term competitive strength. Improvement in quality leads to lower cost because of less rework, fewer mistakes, fewer delays and better use of to me and material. Lower cost, in turn, leads to competitive advantage. It requires a significant amount of expenditures to initiate and drive quality improvement in a company and these expenditures are classified as quality costs. Large organizations spend millions of dollars on implementing and sustaining quality programs. It is generally believed that higher quality means higher cost which is not true if process quality improves so does the product quality ,but so does the cost (Woods 2008).In the 1970s, Japanese manufacturer became strong competitors of U.S. automakers. Influence of W. Edward Deaming, Phil Crosby, Joseph M. Juran led to a change in quality awareness, including total quality management (TQM)\,in which quality was supposed to be everybody's job. According to Berry and Parasuraman (1992) companies spend 10-30% of sales revenue on quality costs. While improving quality, some organizations like Xerox, Motorola and General motor have reduced their cost from 30% of sales to 2%(superville et al.,2003).#p#分页标题#e#

 

质量成本-Cost of Quality:

 

To define cost of quality here is as important as that of quality. Unfortunately, these definitions differ from author to author. Quality control handbook (Juran, 1951) was one of the earliest writing on concept of quality costs. This marked a beginning of subsequent development in field of quality costs. According to Juran (1989,p.376) cost of poor quality as 'the sum of all costs that would disappear if there were no quality problems' and presented a analogy that poor quality and its related costs are 'gold in mine '.Quality costs have traditionally been defined as all expenditures associated with ensuring that product/service conforms to specification (Ittner, 1996).Cost of quality arises from a range of activities and involves a number of departments, all of which impose on the quality of product /services .

 

Quality costs are associated with preventing, finding and correcting defective work. It is completely possible to reduce or avoid these costs .One of the main functions of a quality engineer is reduction of total cost of quality associated with product or services.

 

Traditionally, there are two trends of thought that normally explains in a different way the behavior of quality costs:

 

'Quality is free'

 

The economic school

 

Quality is free proves that cost of quality does not have economic effect because it is not an asset which can be bought or sold. The cost of quality concept is summarized in Crosby's book quality is free (1980, p.115). He quotes, 'Quality is free-it's not a gift, but it is free. What actually costs money is an un-quality thing-all those actions and things that involve not doing the job right the first time'. The classic economic model establishes that there exists uneconomic relationship between the two categories of quality cost: to invest in conformity cost will reduce the cost of non -conformity; that is to say that model obtains an optimum total cost.

 

Cost accounting has been an important function to most firms. Organizations measure costs as a basis for control and improvement. Traditionally the quality related costs had been limited to inspection and testing, others costs were accumulated in overheads accounts. As managers began to define and isolate the full range of quality -related costs, a number of surprising facts emerged (Grayna.1988). Firstly it emerged that quality related costs were much larger than previously reported ,generally in the range of 20 to 40% of sales .secondly quality related costs were not only related to manufacturing operation but to ancillary service such as purchasing and customer service department as well. It also emerged that most of the cost resulted from poor quality and were avoidable. Finally, while the cost of poor quality was avoidable there were no assigned actions, nor was there any structured approach formulated to reduce them. As a result many companies started formulating a cost of quality programs. According to Evans and Lindsay (1996) the most important objective of quality cost program is to translate quality problem in to the language of upper management -the language of money. Juran (1951) noted workers and superior speak in the language of units defects .Quality problems expressed as the number of defects have a no impact on managers who are generally more concerned with financial performance .But if the magnitude of quality problems can be translated in money terms the eyes of managers are opened .#p#分页标题#e#

 

To establish a cost of quality program one must identify, measure, report and analyze the activities that generate cost.

 

大师的质量成本-GURU'S ON COST OF QUALITY:

 

A.V Feigenbaum

 

Though the first on cost of quality was made by Juran but he was not clear how to reduce them. His concept remained as theory until the article on quality cost system which was written by Feigenbaum(1956).He defined cost of quality as the ratio to sale of any manufacturing costs in excess of what would have been incurred if the product had been built right the first time . He considered quality in terms of the degree of conformation to an established level. Feigenbaum(1956) was one of the first few researcher to classify quality cost in a familiar categories of prevention, appraisal and failure(internal and external cost). But there were limitations. His classification did not include intangible quality cost such as 'Loss of customer goodwill' and 'Loss of sale'. He ignored the positive contribution price and sale volume by improved quality.

 

P.B Crosby

 

Crosby (1984) focused his attention on cost reduction and process cost approach. His model categorized quality cost in to the price of conformance (POC) and price of non conformance (PONC). But again it did not consider the process cost. It does not clearly indicate the cost incurred when product fails inside the factory walls and after it id delivered to the customer.

 

J.M Juran

 

Sales cost and intangible costs. But again the limitation with his categorization was that it did Juran (1989) advocated categorization of quality cost in to tangible factory cost, tangible not include the importance of costs that were incurred on prevention activities.

 

衡量质量成本-Measuring the Cost of Quality

 

The importance of measurement is driven home even further when leaders and management recognize that business failure cost are an indicator of what is called the companies "hidden organization" created by lost capacity resulting from the business failure cost. (Feigenbaum 2008)

 

One of the most important steps in total quality management (TQM) is measuring the quality costs. The information on quality costs indicates major opportunity for preventives as well as corrective measures and helps to point out the strength and weaknesses in a quality management system (Sui & yeo, 1998). The American Society for quality control (ASQC, 1971) quality cost committee stressed on the magnitude and importance of product quality to the well being of a business through the measurement of cost of quality.

 

Cost of quality can be collected and measured using many models .Juran(1951) and feigenbaum (1956) proposed the traditional P-A_F method. It classifies quality cost in to:#p#分页标题#e#

 

Prevention costs

 

Appraisal costs

 

Failure costs

 

Prevention costs are considered to be actions taken to ensure that process provides quality product and services. Appraisal costs are related with measuring the level of quality attained by the process whereas failure costs are incurred to correct quality in product and services before delivery to the costumer. The PAF model attempts to achieve an optimal level of quality by balancing the trade-offs between prevention-appraisal (conformance) and failure (non-conformance) costs. The main premises of the model include:

 

. Quality level is determined by conformance to specifications.

 

. As quality level increases, the failure cost decreases at a decreasing rate.

 

. As quality level increases, the prevention-appraisal cost increases at an increasing rate.

 

. Total quality cost is the sum of prevention-appraisal and failure costs.

 

. The optimal quality level is determined by minimizing the firm's total quality cost.

 

The cost categories of Corsby's model (Crosby, 1979) are similar to P-A-F .Crosby defined quality as "conformance to requirements", and therefore, defines cost of quality as sum of price of conformance and price of non-conformance (Crosby 1979).Process cost model is another quality costing approach. It was developed by Ross (1977) and was first used for quality costing by Marsh(1989).This model represents the quality cost system that focus on process rather than product or services .

 

There are several references that propose cost of quality models that include the additional category of intangible costs. Intangible costs are the costs that can only be estimated as the profit not earned because of lost customer and reduction in revenue owing to non conformance. Review of literature reveals many models describing the relationships between the major categories of quality costs. Carr and Ponoemon (1994), Chauvel and Andre (1985) and Ittner (1992, 1994, 1996) have all tried to set up relationships among quality cost components by using various statistical techniques. The basic suppositions of these models are 'that investment in prevention and appraisal activities will bring handsome rewards from reduced failure costs, and further investment in prevention activities will show profits from reduced appraisal costs' (Ittner, 1996).Some of the important points :

 

. The most expensive component of quality cost is internal failure.

 

. The combination of internal and external failure costs is always higher than the combination of prevention and appraisal costs.

 

. The least expensive component of the overall quality cost is prevention.

 

. As the volume of output increases the quality reject rate steadily decreases

 

According to Plunkett and Dale (1988) models of quality-cost relationships published in the literature can into five groups. In group a models the principle of reducing failure and appraisal costs by increasing expenditure on prevention activities. The group B Models plotts all data against a linear time base rather than some measure ofquality performance. In group C models, costs of quality are plotted against quality development stages. Group D model demonstrate the relationships between the major cost categories and suggests the cost savings to be expected from investment in prevention or appraisal activities. In Group E models the rate of change of cost with quality is much greater and the optimum is positioned much closer to perfection. According toPlunkett and Dale(1988, p. 42) 'Many of the models are inaccurate and misleading, and serious doubts are cast on the concept of an optimum quality cost'. Schneiderman (1986) also suggests that, if enough effort is put into prevention, no defects at all would be produced, resulting in zero failure costs and no need for appraisal (alsogiven in Porter & Rayner, 1992). Asokan and Pillai (1998) reveals the major contributors to the total quality cost are failure cost and appraisal cost. Zhao (2000) states that the rate of change of failure cost are closely associated with the perfection rate. Zhao (2000) also states that when the perfection rate is less, prevention and appraisal cost also will be small.

 

Gryna(1988) recognizes several problems that have caused cost -of-quality approach to fail .Quality cost analysis looks only at the company's costs but not at the customers cost.

 

The suppliers and manufacturers are definitely not the only stakeholders who bear quality related costs. The customer also suffers quality related cost too. If a product/service is bad the customer faces significant expenses in dealing with that bad product.

 

Abed and Dale (1987), Whitehall (1986) found out that industry should devise its own definition and categorization of quality cost within a framework of widely accepted category of prevention appraisal and failures (PAF).It was thought to a good idea to develop an industry specific quality cost category .Plunkett and Dale (1988) suggested that quality cost categories are dependent on structure and technology of the enterprise. They further revealed that each organization has a cost element that are specific to its situation and that depend on factors such as type of product, technology and company size. The literature has recently emphasized on the importance of opportunity and intangible cost for quality costing. A less formal method of collecting quality cost was described by Dale and Plunkett (1999).A recently propose cost of quality methodology is a method based on team approach, in which the aim is to identify the costs associated with things that have gone wrong in a process(Robinson,1997). Some other authors have also made major contributions to cost of quality approach like Son & Hsu(1991) proposed a quantitative approach for measuring quality costs it considered both manufacturing processes and statistical quality control. But this approach was restricted to a simplified manufacturing system which couls only include machine area and a final inspection area. Chen & Tang (1992) categorized Cost of Quality into direct Cost Of Quality variables (PAF costs & quality related equipment costs) and indirect cost of quality variables (Customer incurred costs, Customer dissatisfaction costs and loss of reputation). But specifying variables puts complexity for quality practitioners.#p#分页标题#e#

 

It does not matter which quality costing approach is used, the core idea behind cost of quality analysis is the linking of improvement activities with associated costs and customer expectation, which allows targeted action for reducing quality costs and increasing benefits of quality improvements. A realistic estimate of cost of quality, which is the appropriate tradeoff between the levels of conformance and non conformance costs, should be considered as an essential element of any quality initiative and a crucial issue for any manager. Every company should choose and cost of quality method that suite its need and situation best. Because there is difference in markets, products and services, organizations, geographic scope and other consideration, individual company must specify measurement area within the business failure cost structure that benefits its own business requirement. For example for a manufacturing industry internal failure costs might include scrap and rework, while for finance same cost might include computer down time or data entry errors.

 

管理质量成本-Managing the cost of quality

 

In the past, except for the departmental activities of inspection and testing this concept had not been extended to quality function. There were, of course, many other quality-related costs, but they were scattered among various heads of account, especially overheads. The typical quality cost would just reveal a small fraction in relation to the total cost. Instinctive reactions of a manager on discovering that the costs are pitifully low is to look more attentively at the possibilities of ignoring the importance of quality actions and their consequences.

 

The new ISO 10014 standard for realization of financial and economic benefits recommends that effective management of resources and implementation of applicable processes for improving the overall worth and health of the organization. Financial benefit is the result of organizational improvement expressed in monetary form, and realized by cost-effective management practices within the organization. Following list of financial benefit that can be achieved with effective cost-effective management:

 

Improved profitability

 

Improved revenues

 

Improved budgetary performance

 

Reduced costs

 

Improved cash flow

 

Improved return on investment

 

Increased competitiveness

 

Improved customer retention

 

Improved decision making

 

Effective use of available resources

 

Heightened employee accountability

 

Improved intellectual capital#p#分页标题#e#

 

Effective and efficient processes and supply chain

 

Managing costs of quality as investment and measuring of cost of non-conformities in dollars is possible and can be integrated easy in the management of business processes of ISO 9001 quality management system. An integration of cost of quality procedure into the ISO 9001 is a practice used by a lot of businesses. An implementation of such a procedure provides real data to the management review from the periodic evaluations of non-quality cost of product, processes and resources: ineffective time, overtime, waste of resources, excessive inventory, high turnover, frequent departures and hiring of new employees. When the processes display the cost of quality and the process results are quantified in financial term it is very helpful for management to take actions. Analysis of these results can provide opportunities for improvement can facilitate adequate use of resources and can initiate preventive and corrective actions for elimination of roots causes of major problems. It is practical to implement the measurement of quality costs for material, information and human activities of an organization. The quality costs management focuses on reduction of non-quality cost and on improvement of process efficiency. But the Improvement aspect of ISO9001 has been limited, many firms decide to stick to stick to minimum level of compliance.

 

According to the old approaches for costs of quality evaluation, the 4-sigma level was the optimum balance between prevention cost and non-quality cost. 4-sigma quality is quantified, as 6,210 defected parts per million and the non-quality exceed 15%-20% of sales revenue. According to National Institute of Standard and Technology (www.nist.gov) the companies like Motorola, Honeywell, General Electric, Lockheed Martin, Texas Instruments, Bank of America, Bank of Montreal and many others prove that the investment in human resources training on quality can be rewarded 100 times better and the maximum level is 6-sigma. Six-sigma quality is quantified as 3.4 defected parts per million and the non-quality costs are less than 4 % of sales. Motorola succeed to reduce cost of non-quality down to 2.5 percent of sales, compared to the averaged 3.1 percent of sales for the manufacturing companies who are recipients of national quality award. Defect rate is only 52 parts per million, or 5.38 Sigma. Manufacturing cycle time measure for subscriber equipment decreased from 3.25 days to 2.4 days for 3 years.

 

According to Baldridge national quality program Employee productivity measured as sales per employee, increased 32 % over the same period of time. There is really nothing new about six sigma approach except application .the effort to start six sigma approach is prevention cost .return on investment (ROI) comes from reduced appraisal and failure cost. The actual tool used in six sigma is same as tool used by Quality assurance staff.#p#分页标题#e#

 

Many experts in operational management and manufacturing disciplines believe that the key to Japanese success is its revolutionary and organized quality system Program like

 

Statistical Quality Control (SQC) and Just in Time (JIT) production are the two reasons among other, why Japanese excelled in improving quality at lower manufacturing cost.

 

According to one estimate implementation of SQC and JIT gives one Japanese automaker a $2100 advantage per car (Sullivan ). Japanese industries high product quality at lower cost is not because of lower wage rate, modern equipment, the existence of economies of scale or any other such mythical factors. Their success has resulted from a better control system - namely JIT and SQC programmes .

 

衡量和管理质量成本的优点-Advantages of measuring and managing cost of quality

 

The clear quantification of non-quality cost lead to real cost reduction. Organizations that develop the necessary processes for measuring non-quality cost and that provide strong leadership to eliminate their causes have achieved cost reduction amounting to 10% or more of revenues and have increased customer satisfaction and retention. This is more relevant in times of business stress when the speed and the commitment surpass the slowdown, recession and uncertainty. In a good time when the solid economic growth is in the horizon, world-class businesses that measures cost of quality (non-quality is less than 4% from sales) can afford increasing search and development, elevated customers needs, aggressive global competition and unexpected market pressure. Cost of quality analysis is a generator of improvement actions focused to improve the business performance and to reduce waste of resources and departures of best talents. The results are: impressive saving for the bottom line, increased customer satisfaction, significantly improved revenues and better operating margins.

 

In conclusion, measuring and managing The Cost of Quality is a powerful tool in identifying areas for improvement in an organisation:

 

• By converting problems that are often seen as inevitable into tangible costs, it enables management to see their real impact on profitability for the first time.

 

• By identifying problems of waste, delay and inefficiency, it enables employees at all levels to take greater responsibility for the efficient running of the organisation.

 

• By helping organizations to focus on business processes, it opens up a whole range of related improvement opportunities.

 

• It offers a continuing measure of improvement, it offers the means to build and maintain momentum in any improvement program.#p#分页标题#e#

 

总结-Conclusion

 

Cost of Quality, or the cost of poor quality, has been an underpinning concept in quality for more than 50 years .Quality professionals have been teaching the tools, and they expect that quality in business and products would result. Sometimes it does some time it doesn't. But the idea that these issues are not just manufacturing still remains. Quality has spread to cultures outside U.S. and Japan. TQM evolved in to advanced improvements like Six Sigma. ISO9001 and other standards have devolved to ensure companies compile with basic quality processes. Quality concepts are seemingly more accessible than ever before. But the Quality professionals are not reaching business leaders with a clear message. Mostly business leaders are introduced to quality at master level .Many master level programs have one class in quality principles. Perhaps too much or too little information is presented to future leaders in poor and non organized manner. The education on quality should be connected to real world. The term cost of quality is well understood by quality professional but it still is very confusing to many business leaders.