Many companies have introduced "quality cost" measurement schemes for achieving high quality standard but some companies' philosophy has been that no measurement procedures should be devoted, especially to the measurement of quality cost. Quality cost schemes designed to measure performance in this area are considered to add to administrative burden. Discuss the reality of the differences of philosophy; do they represent fundamental differences or may they be reconciled?
While the cost of quality and measurement of quality cost initiatives do create an administrative burden, there is one main advantage to this type of initiative. When companies have quality cost measurement schemes or initiatives for achieving a high quality standard, it actually sets a quality program into place that is adhered to, and that measures quality through both qualitative ...
This solution discusses quality cost measurement schemes. I explain the reality between the differences of philosophy in cost measurement, and if they are representative of fundamental differences of if the differences can be adequately reconciled.