Quality of design and quality of conformance: Contingency and synergistic approaches

Abstract

The distinction between design quality and conformance quality has not been systematically analysed in the literature. On the one hand, there is no sufficient distinction between these two elements in reference to many TQM themes, which are addressed too ‘totally’ in the sense that quality is taken as a whole, undivided phenomenon. On the other hand, quality of design and quality of conformance are referred to as separate, independently coexisting phenomena. This paper studies these two quality dimensions as opposite and conflicting sides of a paradox that complicates quality management. Conflict between design and conformance quality can be handled in two main ways. One is a contingency approach, whose purpose is to determine correct prioritization between the two dimensions and allocate resources accordingly. This paper focuses on contextual variables such as: stages of industry, product, and organizational life cycle; organizational technology; generic competitive strategy; international strategy; and level of uncertainty. The second possibility is to employ an integrative, or synergistic, approach, which is based on a win-win perspective that the improvement of one element can contribute to the improvement of another.

Notes

1. Sometimes, there is only one specification limit, whereas the other one is not relevant. For instance, waiting time in a line has a target of 0 and a maximum level of, say, 15 minutes, which represents the upper specification limit. A lower specification limit does not exist here.

2. The notion of a higher specification limit should not cause confusion: the fact that it is higher than the nominal value does not mean that it is better. What matters is the absolute value of distance between the nominal value and specification limit.