Is "Quality" just "Fitness for Use"?

Elsmar Forum Sponsor

bobdoering

Stop X-bar/R Madness!!
Trusted Information Resource
#62
Exactly. I'm a trade snob :tg:
I am willing to by tools at Dollar Tree - it depends on the use. I have lots of dollar diagonal wire cutters in my stuff - but their main purpose in life is cutting wire ties. More the merrier, too - I hate looking for them. :tg:
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#63
At to your purchase preference, I would go with the $7 one. My thought is that if they skimped on the sticker adhesive, what else did they skimp on?
But isn't this line of thinking antithetical to our line of work? We're supposed to know not to make a judgment on a large population based on the attributes of an individual, no? Suppose the manufacturer's outgoing PPM level of defects is 10. Someone is going to wind up with those ten pieces, and from what I've seen in this thread, some of them are going to make unreasonable judgments on the manufacturer's processes.

My point is (and my reason for bringing it up in the first place) that you can't make a rational judgment based on a single piece. There are people who will be driven crazy by seeing a picture on a neighbor's wall that's hanging crooked, and might even feel compelled to straighten it themselves. This has nothing to do with rationality, and everything to do with personal neurosis and the personal neuroses of individual customers should never be a part of the FMEA process.
 

BradM

Staff member
Admin
#64
But isn't this line of thinking antithetical to our line of work? We're supposed to know not to make a judgment on a large population based on the attributes of an individual, no? Suppose the manufacturer's outgoing PPM level of defects is 10. Someone is going to wind up with those ten pieces, and from what I've seen in this thread, some of them are going to make unreasonable judgments on the manufacturer's processes.
Yes, we are, as quality professionals. But are we always quality professionals in our purchasing decisions?

In this example, I am obsessive compulsive, so the crooked label is out of the question.:tg: You're right Jim, you and I know that. But I don't want the 1 out of 10, do you?:D


My point is (and my reason for bringing it up in the first place) that you can't make a rational judgment based on a single piece. There are people who will be driven crazy by seeing a picture on a neighbor's wall that's hanging crooked, and might even feel compelled to straighten it themselves. This has nothing to do with rationality, and everything to do with personal neurosis and the personal neuroses of individual customers should never be a part of the FMEA process.
Yes:agree1:, and that is a good mini-thesis for the frustration of walking/talking Service Quality. Neurosis should not be, but it is. You either manage it, ignore it, or try to minimize it, IMHO.

Good thread, Jim. You earned your paycheck this week.:tg:
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#65
Granted that this is a cute saying, but it is not a definition. It's like saying to your kids. The best person for you to marry is the one you are going to be happy with. That doesn't say what the person will be like.
It's a lot more than a cute saying. Stanley Marcus, and his father before him, made it a way of doing business.

I'll explain why "quality" can't be rationally defined, and why trying to do so will always be futile and deteriorate into navel-gazing. Get comfortable, because this might take a while (but you asked for it :D).

First, let's do a little substitution: instead of saying that a certain product has quality, let's say instead that it's beautiful. I, a random individual who's looking for a product, believe that this is a beautiful car:



I think it's beautiful because it's exactly what I'm looking for. I need parts, or I want to restore the car. Is this a "quality" car? It is to me.

Aside from the quality-in-the-eye-of-the-beholder idea, there's another impediment, and that is that "quality" is a political word, here using "political" in its broadest sense, as in "company politics." For this I commend to your attention the 1946 essay by George Orwell entitled Politics and the English Language which I've recommended before.

In the essay, Orwell says this of political language:
Political language...is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.
Except perhaps for the murder part, this is precisely what is done with the word "quality."

Orwell goes on to say:
In certain kinds of writing, particularly in art criticism and literary criticism, it is normal to come across long passages which are almost completely lacking in meaning. Words like romantic, plastic, values, human, dead, sentimental, natural, vitality, as used in art criticism, are strictly meaningless, in the sense that they not only do not point to any discoverable object, but are hardly ever expected to do so by the reader.

When one critic writes, "The outstanding feature of Mr. X's work is its living quality," while another writes, "The immediately striking thing about Mr. X's work is its peculiar deadness," the reader accepts this as a simple difference opinion. If words like black and white were involved, instead of the jargon words dead and living, he would see at once that language was being used in an improper way.

Many political words are similarly abused. The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies "something not desirable." The words democracy, socialism, freedom, patriotic, realistic, justice have each of them several different meanings which cannot be reconciled with one another. In the case of a word like democracy, not only is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides. It is almost universally felt that when we call a country democratic we are praising it: consequently the defenders of every kind of regime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using that word if it were tied down to any one meaning. Words of this kind are often used in a consciously dishonest way. That is, the person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows his hearer to think he means something quite different.
(Bold added)

So you see, "quality" is rendered meaningless not only because it exists in the minds of individuals--and their own definitions might not be in concert with one another--but because businesses use it as political language in the same sense that Orwell describes the use of "freedom" and "democracy." They are like Lewis Carroll's Humpty-Dumpty in Through the Looking Glass, who tells the incredulous Alice that words mean precisely what he intends them to mean, and nothing more (and nothing else.)

So while others try to put toothpaste back in the tube in attempting to a compose a one-size-fits all definition of "quality," I'll side with Mr. Marcus. Find out how to make money by making customers want more of what you're selling, and don't get eaten by a carnivorous amphibious reptile while trying to decide whether if it's an alligator or a crocodile.

That's all I have to say about that.

 

bobdoering

Stop X-bar/R Madness!!
Trusted Information Resource
#66
This has nothing to do with rationality, and everything to do with personal neurosis and the personal neuroses of individual customers should never be a part of the FMEA process.
It should never be a part of the FMEA process, but it will be if you want them to sign off on the PPAP! :biglaugh:
 
J

JaneB

#67
Excellent posts and discussion Jim. And fascinating essay (thanks!).

Although I think calling a matter of personal preference a 'neurosis' is rather overstating the case. Or maybe simply it's another example of political language at work. ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Randy

Super Moderator
#68
Yep, I've had more than one muddy hole in the ground that for some poeple wouldn't even be close to a quality lodging, but because of my circumstances it was a Hilton:lol:

My expectations were met
 
J

JaneB

#69
Yep, I've had more than one muddy hole in the ground that for some poeple wouldn't even be close to a quality lodging, but because of my circumstances it was a Hilton:lol:

My expectations were met
Me too. Though in my case 'twere a crummy hostel room with a hard bed - but in the particular circumstances, great!
 
R

Rinascimento

#70
It's a lot more than a cute saying. Stanley Marcus, and his father before him, made it a way of doing business.

I'll explain why "quality" can't be rationally defined, and why trying to do so will always be futile and deteriorate into navel-gazing. Get comfortable, because this might take a while (but you asked for it :D).

First, let's do a little substitution: instead of saying that a certain product has quality, let's say instead that it's beautiful. I, a random individual who's looking for a product, believe that this is a beautiful car:



I think it's beautiful because it's exactly what I'm looking for. I need parts, or I want to restore the car. Is this a "quality" car? It is to me.

Aside from the quality-in-the-eye-of-the-beholder idea, there's another impediment, and that is that "quality" is a political word, here using "political" in its broadest sense, as in "company politics." For this I commend to your attention the 1946 essay by George Orwell entitled Politics and the English Language which I've recommended before.

In the essay, Orwell says this of political language:
Except perhaps for the murder part, this is precisely what is done with the word "quality."

Orwell goes on to say:
(Bold added)

So you see, "quality" is rendered meaningless not only because it exists in the minds of individuals--and their own definitions might not be in concert with one another--but because businesses use it as political language in the same sense that Orwell describes the use of "freedom" and "democracy." They are like Lewis Carroll's Humpty-Dumpty in Through the Looking Glass, who tells the incredulous Alice that words mean precisely what he intends them to mean, and nothing more (and nothing else.)

So while others try to put toothpaste back in the tube in attempting to a compose a one-size-fits all definition of "quality," I'll side with Mr. Marcus. Find out how to make money by making customers want more of what you're selling, and don't get eaten by a carnivorous amphibious reptile while trying to decide whether if it's an alligator or a crocodile.

That's all I have to say about that.
Hi Jim,


Thank-you for giving me what you think I “asked for”.


You seem to think that these would be new insights for me. If you look at my earlier posts in this thread you will see that I quoted Garvin and his 5 categories of definitions of quality.
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showpost.php?p=304772&postcount=33
That should have alerted you to the fact that I am in no way saying or even intimating that there is a one-size-fits all measure of quality (and I use the term”measure” rather than “definition” deliberately).


I have no problem with your quality car. I have always said that there is no difference in quality between a $1 Cheap Charlie's watch and a Rolex if they both provide provide the time function I want.


We do not all have a platonic view of the world, - thinking that quality is a reality “out there” to be discovered. For many of us quality is something that is specific to a situation. It is something that exists relative to context and exists or is created through communication. This is why there need to be methods to discover what quality means in a particular context. Kepner-Tregoe and similar decision making methods identifies, categorizes and ranks quality attributes to aid making decisions about which offerings provide the best/most suitable quality/qualities. Systems specifications are a list of desired functional and non-functional qualities that can be validated in the delivered product.


There are similarities between “quality” and “beauty”. But the words are not synonyms. I may be able to specify qualities in a picture – e.g. subject matter, dimensions, composition, but I am not sure if I could specify its beauty, as I understand beauty to be more subjective. Of course, you could choose a definition for beauty which would allow specification.


And this brings us on to connotations of words and politics in language.
We must accept that words are used with multiple meanings, and that these meanings are understood from the context in which they are used. It is also the case that languages change over time, so that the commonly understood range of meanings of a word change with time. Back in the 60's my English Lit teacher said of a man that he was a “Gay bird”. We schoolboys laughed because, for our subculture, “bird” was the word we used for girls. Since then, “Gay” has also taken on a new meaning. The church I was brought up in regarded itself as fundamentalist because it kept to what it saw as the fundamentals = essence of Christianity. Today 'fundamentalist” has the connotations of terrorism and intolerance.
One of my “bete noirs” is the non-scientific advertising use of “scientific” and “scientifically proven”.
It might be said that these word have been politicised. I would not say that they are political words as being political does not reside as a quality of a word, but only in its usage. (Note that Orwell's use of “political” is as an adjective for words that are used in the context of politics as commonly understood. Have you abused the word “political” by using it the way you did and rendered it meaningless?


But does the political use of a word render it meaningless?


I have seen plenty of adverts claiming or inferring that their products are ISO 9001 certified. Does this misuse make ISO 9001 meaningless?


I don't think because Marxism has been described as scientific, that that means the word “scientific” is rendered meaningless. I think that the very fact that we can see when a word is misused validates that we can still use it correctly. In the last paragraph you quote from Orwell he allows the possibility of agreed definitions. I think we should make every effort to do this, or we will end up doing what Orwell condemns.


And talking about the misuse of words, let's go back to your use of definition. Here there is a danger that you will mislead people into thinking that you have provided a definition, when it is no definition. I doubt that you are using the term “definition” about Marcus' cute saying in a “consciously dishonest way” but Orwell would say it is a “passage almost completely lacking in meaning. … that … does not point to any discoverable object....”.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
N Guidance - Cost of Good Quality Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 2
D Quality plan for moving locations ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
was named killer Job Opportunity-Quality Engineer-Tampa Florida Job Openings, Consulting and Employment Opportunities 0
Marc Job Opportunity – Quality Assurance Specialist - Suspense 7 April 2021 Job Openings, Consulting and Employment Opportunities 0
C Requirement to link Quality Manual to ISO 9001 clause numbers? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 13
normhowe "The Problem with Quality Management: Process orientation, controllability and zero-defect processes as modern myths" Book, Video, Blog and Web Site Reviews and Recommendations 2
J Quality Objective for QMS prior to Certification AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 8
J Quality Objectives and resources ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
M PSA Suppliers - CSR matrix and need the quality manual of PSA APQP and PPAP 2
A Quality Control Datasheets Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 0
T Quality auditor legal right to see Board meeting minutes ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 12
D Any recommendations on where to find experienced quality hires in Chicago area? Job Openings, Consulting and Employment Opportunities 3
C Budgetary cost to obtain ASME NQA-1 Quality Program Certification Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 0
O Soft and technical skills for a VP of Quality Career and Occupation Discussions 1
P MedWatch Report from a hospital due to a quality issue US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 5
Sidney Vianna Release of ISO 10013:2021, Quality management systems – Guidance for documented information Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 0
M Unique Quality Management System for 2 sites ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
G Application to Chartered Quality Institute - MCQI ASQ, ANAB, UKAS, IAF, IRCA, Exemplar Global and Related Organizations 2
K Quality Agreement MDR - The manufacturer is outside of EU Other Medical Device Related Standards 4
Sidney Vianna Informational APQP4Wind - Advanced Product Quality Planning for the Wind Power Supply Chain APQP and PPAP 3
T 21 CFR 820.20 - Quality Planning Requirements? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
S Supplier protocol for the Quality Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 6
bruceian Software Quality Metrics Software Quality Assurance 11
R Quality System Functional Safety Checklist / Guidance IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 0
Bev D Essential References for Practical Quality Engineering Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 0
optomist1 Automotive News The Cost of Inspecting In Quality IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 7
O Any info on release date of FDA “Computer Software Assurance for Manufacturing and Quality System Software” document? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 0
M Quality Manual - Where does Revision History Section go? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 8
John Broomfield CIOB - Code of Quality Management Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 1
S Quality Audit Training Activities Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 2
D Are Supplier Quality Agreements Quality Records ? Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 9
D Big companies suffer from quality management system? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
K Looking for a job as Quality Engineer Career and Occupation Discussions 2
B Two excellent examples of process capability analysis from Quality Magazine Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 5
Pau Calvo Quality Management process is mandatory in ISO9001? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
NDesouza No Quality Professional vs Having a Quality Professional Benchmarking 24
F Does anyone have an ESD quality/cooler talk to share? Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 4
R Monitor production quality - Internal KPIs Manufacturing and Related Processes 5
U Examples of Quality Objectives for a Medtech start up ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
M SemaTech SSQA Standardized Supplier Quality Assessment - my favorite tool ever Manufacturing and Related Processes 1
D Supplier Quality level category help - high level ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
R How would you work without a quality management system? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
P Conformity assessment based on a quality management system or production quality assurance EU Medical Device Regulations 3
H Updating Quality Manual to API Q1 Service Industry Specific Topics 6
R Electrical contractor Project Quality Management Plan Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 1
D Supplier Quality - How to classify a supplier level Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 10
R China Quality Certification Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 1
S Quality management system (Well head installation & maintenance) Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 5
V Quality review Meeting with Customer for complaints we received Customer Complaints 6
G Copy of withdrawn ISO 9001:1994 Quality Management Standard ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2

Similar threads

Top Bottom