J
joe7071
Each of this gentlemen have their own approach to reach a goal. What is the similarities between Juran, Deming and Crosby and it must be backup by each individual's quality improvement plans.
Last edited by a moderator:
There had been a lot of discussions on this subject. Scroll down the page to the 'similar discussions' box to read all the 5 similar threads. By the way, it's Juran and not Juron.
Actually there is only one discussion thread here on the topic that has many posts in it. I had thought there were several, but apparently not which discuss all three in one thread.
See: Quality Gurus: Question on Comparison of Philosophies: Deming, Crosby, Juran
See: Quality Gurus: Question on Comparison of Philosophies: Deming, Crosby, Juran
Well I like this question, because often the focus seems to be the differences, and you ask about similarities 
Studying for the exam, there is a world of differences between them, they are just sooooo different!!! And we talked about pro/con for each of them.
When it comes to the practical approach, it is actually only the façade, if you go deep enough they are really not that different (e.g. from a philosophy perspective)!
If you want similarities of what they do not take into account, the list is long...
At the surface, you might look at these matrices in the other link/thread (e.g. see the link from Sathis), and find similarities like, okay they all focus on the importance of the management responsibility or the process/ongoing concept etc...
That said you actually answered it yourself, they all focus on their own approach! - but can they be integrated with other approaches!?
With inspiration from Revees & Bednar (1994)'s multiple approach, I for some years ago suggested some alternative integrated views, here u get two examples (the focus was only the product):
Time/cycles: A product goes through all the "quality approaches" depending on its "age"/situation. This view includes theories of speed!
Organizational: Different departments focus on one of the quality approaches, so the challenge is to create an across language! (This is why one single approach might be easier).
Studying for the exam, there is a world of differences between them, they are just sooooo different!!! And we talked about pro/con for each of them.
When it comes to the practical approach, it is actually only the façade, if you go deep enough they are really not that different (e.g. from a philosophy perspective)!
If you want similarities of what they do not take into account, the list is long...
At the surface, you might look at these matrices in the other link/thread (e.g. see the link from Sathis), and find similarities like, okay they all focus on the importance of the management responsibility or the process/ongoing concept etc...
That said you actually answered it yourself, they all focus on their own approach! - but can they be integrated with other approaches!?
With inspiration from Revees & Bednar (1994)'s multiple approach, I for some years ago suggested some alternative integrated views, here u get two examples (the focus was only the product):
Time/cycles: A product goes through all the "quality approaches" depending on its "age"/situation. This view includes theories of speed!
Organizational: Different departments focus on one of the quality approaches, so the challenge is to create an across language! (This is why one single approach might be easier).
Thanks sorin. Your link well summarizes -
To conclude, while one might at first glance think that Deming, Juran, and Crosby have different approaches to the management of quality, in the final analysis all three insist on the same basic principles. As Crosby aptly pointed out, the main difference lies in the perspective one takes. While an inherently subjective term such as quality can easily take on a multitude of definitions, it is clear that these three leaders of the quality movement are pointing in the same direction.
Interesting link, I just want to comment on another part of the conclusion:
"Deming’s perspective is customer-driven and relies heavily on market research to determine what the customer will define as a quality product or service. Juran’s, while not independent of the marketplace, is more engineering-driven, designed to translate the customer’s vision of quality into that which can be produced."
Sometimes customers/marketplaces are engineers...!
"Deming’s perspective is customer-driven and relies heavily on market research to determine what the customer will define as a quality product or service. Juran’s, while not independent of the marketplace, is more engineering-driven, designed to translate the customer’s vision of quality into that which can be produced."
Sometimes customers/marketplaces are engineers...!
T
tisha
This information was very helpful thanks!
Similar threads
