The genesis of the term “quality” originates around 1300 from the Latin “qualitas” and from the word “qualis” (of what kind or of what nature). This focuses on the end goal and the description of what is acceptable. As we fast-forward to today, the quality of ingredients, products and processes are surrounded with multiple opinions, approaches and applications (of many kinds and nature). The end result of what is acceptable likely varies from one organization to another.
Dr. W. Edwards Deming believed that quality focuses on the customer (meeting their expectations). He believed that quality was everyone’s responsibility. He created a quality theory focusing on continually improving which was called Total Quality Management (TQM). This was a radical change for the time, but simple. He believed if you improved the quality of your process you would move to reducing costs, but if you made decisions to reduce costs, you would ultimately reduce quality. There is something to think about in that approach. Is quality something to consider when in the middle of a recall or in the middle of a market push?
Over the decades of industrial growth, quality started with controlling the products and then moved to controlling the process variation. Quality expanded to verifying products and safety. In recent decades, the state of a brand or company’s quality efforts have been described with the certificates reached, the audits fulfilled and the regulatory inspections survived. Meeting these illustrates the efforts needed in documentation, training, testing and detail. It does not necessarily do what Dr. Deming suggested — developing what is necessary to meet the expectations of the customer — as quality teams are rarely in direct communication with consumers.
Defining quality
Quality can be viewed as conformation to standards, specifications and regulations. Quality is expressed differently by each organization. Is it quality control or quality assurance? Or is it total quality management? Do you control quality? Do you assure quality? Do you manage quality? Is quality part of production or part of technology? Are quality personnel considered the “police” of the organization or are they part of providing the vision of the company? Are quality personnel out of sight and mind in the boardroom?
Many articles, seminars and books interpret and define how these are similar, different or are part of the overall oversight strategy. For instance, assurance has been defined as “the act of giving confidence or the state of making certain.” Control has been defined as “the act of guiding consistency.” Most often, quality assurance and quality control are used interchangeably — actions needed to ensure uniform products, ingredients, process, shipment or service.
Proactive vs. reactive thinking
Another way of looking at quality differences is through the lens of being proactive or reactive. Reactive quality tests and reports for immediate production. Proactive quality builds improving processes with production and technology with strategic efficiency. Proactive thinking gets everyone involved in the business quality culture. A carefully prepared recall plan that is fully communicated is proactive. A recall plan that is written but never implemented in training is reactive. Testing of ingredients and products that result in reports is reactive. Testing of ingredients and products that leads to appropriate adjustments in specifications, ingredients ordered and potential cost savings is proactive. An organization needs a readiness that they are prepared for (ready to act). This is not reactive but proactive. It is part of the organization’s fabric.
Advancement of regulatory oversight
During the early years of the development of the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), one major politician stated loudly that we must “have zero tolerance” in food safety. Further, it was suggested “by implementing detailed regulations, we will protect lives and prevent illnesses.” These statements were admirable but limited in understanding. No system is completely fool-proof or without potential error. In the years since the full launch of FSMA, recalls have not been eliminated nor reduced. The basic tenants of FSMA were already in place in a majority of food plants, but the efforts of FSMA did expand them to all plants. On the other hand, FSMA pushed quality as rules and oversight (reactive) in order to minimize mistakes rather than implementing the drive for consumer satisfaction and trust (proactive).
What is acceptable as we advance into 2025?
Based upon myriad experiences, the detail built into quality systems varies from organization to organization. In some cases, it is heavy-handed and controlling; in others, it is quiet and unheard. In some situations, pursuit of quality certification is necessary to meet sales requirements. It is easy to see quality as a combination of control (reactive) and assurance (proactive), but it should also be at the core of each organization.
Strategy and core thinking
In management or strategic meetings, there are members of finance, sales and marketing to determine the paths forward for the business. Strategic planning might include technology and operations, but rarely is quality represented. In general, quality processes are not well-understood strategically. In my experience, many quality personnel have not been trained to focus the technical information into understandable business communiques. Often, they stand as the company’s quality police. Communicating “up” the regular activities and the regular actions taken is a challenge. Quality personnel need to be able to summarize the business protection successes (e.g., ingredient testing) thereby helping the organization understand the challenges to the business, which in turn impacts their customers. Without this, justification for new and more efficient processes and instrumentation with potential cost improvements becomes difficult.
Ford Motor Company once stated in advertisements that “Quality was Job One.” Another automotive group saw the quality built into Honda and Toyota, and they determined to become relevant through building strategic quality throughout their organization. Quality efforts are part of the core of a good growing business. Protecting the business from failure (recall, poor product perception) should be part of the strategy, but a good quality process also elevates the appeal and confidence of consumers. Strategy sets the course of who we are as an organization and the type of products we want to provide. It builds trust in what we do. We “say what we do and then do what we say.”
Besides the quality team, all personnel should be trained to be part of quality with some sort of regularity, with an outcome of building confidence within the entire company. It is most likely that all employees will use the company’s products, and they are more eyes on the nature of what other customers observe. All employees are at the core of the organization’s quality program.
My first vice president boss out of graduate school pulled me aside and encouraged me to “determine ways the business might fail” and then “set out to ensure that it does not.” This was a challenge that I rarely hear in strategy today. Taking the actions necessary to maintain and protect the business are just as important as the strategies for growing new share and new markets. Perhaps it is time to revise how we look at our quality programs. Quality is part of strategy and is core to success in the marketplace.
Briefly: Top 5 takeaways
- Over decades of industrial growth, quality started with controlling the products and then moved to controlling the process variation.
- Quality can be viewed as conformation to standards, specifications and regulations, and is expressed differently by each organization.
- One way of looking at quality differences is through the lens of being proactive or reactive.
- It is easy to see quality as a combination of control (reactive) and assurance (proactive), but it should also be at the core of each organization.
- Strategy sets the course of who we are as an organization and the type of products we want to provide.