What are the most common conflicts in Quality Management?

If this thaught is considered from Pharmaceutical industry what comes at the top as expected quality is the quality that ensures patient safety or if their is an argument between customer and manufacturers on high quality demand the best judgement can be based on what quality is required to ensure patient safety? If the customer is demanding quality beyond ensuring patient safety, that includes cost and in such case the manufacturer is likely to demand higher cost against higher quality . If this is understood well ,there shouldn't be a conflict. Afterall Quality comes at a cost. Same example can be considered in other industries with respect to What customer requires

Main misconceptions i observed: 1. Quality is just about meeting specifications/dimensions: People believe that as long as a product or service meets the specified requirements or standards, it is of high quality. They neglect customer satisfaction, continuous improvement, and overall value. 2. Quality management = documentation: Documentation is an important part of quality management systems, but it is not all about documentation!

Addressing conflicts over quality standards involves aligning organizational quality demands with client expectations, setting stringent procedures, and enforcing communication within the organization. This alignment ensures consistency and minimizes disagreements among stakeholders. By tailoring internal education and development programs, employees are better equipped to meet the most demanding client's standards, reducing conflicts and promoting top-quality products. In this way, conflicts over quality standards can be resolved by creating a unified vision and approach to quality management.

The main challenge in Global Quality Assurance Management for companies is cultivating unwavering Belief. In a top-tier organization, from the CEO to every department and individual, there must be a resolute faith in Global Quality Delivery as the key to success. This shared Belief should permeate all levels of leadership, with leaders demonstrating their commitment through daily actions and leading by example. To thrive, the organization must unite, setting aside conflicts arising from short-term goals and functioning as a cohesive team firmly grounded in implemented systems. This Belief propels the organization toward customer satisfaction, surpassing competitors, and fostering harmonious synergy, akin to a well-coordinated orchestra.

The list and sources of conflict mentioned in this article are genuine. However, in my experience, these arise from a long held thinking/approach that QMS is synonymous or means only compliance. Most organisations will implement QMS to get certified/licensed. Hence resource allocation, communication, responsibilities are all identified and organised with compliance in mind, not on the quality of running the entire business. Conflict arise as a result of a compliance mindset, not a quality mindset.

I think that the common conflict internally is about production team and quality team, we are conflict among production volume/capacity vs Quality. However, to maintain the sustainability of the business, quality must come first to driven you a longer way. This will directly increase the volume too.

Lack of Standardization: Inconsistent processes and standards across different teams or locations can create conflicts. Standardization is essential for ensuring consistent quality.

Some people treat internal standards as flexible as opposed to customer standards that are published on certificate of analysis. These are granite hard quality specifications that need to be met, regardless of whether or not they are on COAs or not.

Man sieht an diesem KI-generierten Beitrag beispielhaft, welchen Unsinn diese Systeme erzeugen, wenn es nicht durch Fachleute geprüft wird. Das ist Zeitverschwendung für alle Beteiligten. Daher beteilige ich mich nicht an der Diskussion - die Texte sind vielfach grundlegend falsch.

“Gestão da qualidade é a junção do processo, técnicas e estratégia com o objetivo de assegurar que o produto seja entregue conforme a expectativas.” No meu ponto de vista o funcionário que trabalha na gestão da qualidade, deve ser mais participativo com o processo, verificando junto com o mesmo se nova meta imposta o colaborador ou mesmo a empresa tem recurso suficiente para realizar. Quando gerado uma meta e não tem recurso para realizar acaba tendo retrabalho ou até descarte do produto, causando mais gastos para empresa. O melhor apoio que qualidade tem com a produção é levar verdadeira situação para todos os envolvidos, e mostrar o que se pode fazer para chegar na expectativa desejada.

When addressing conflicts over quality methods, it's common for team members and stakeholders to have differing opinions. Flexibility is essential for resolution. Accurate data analysis plays a pivotal role in selecting the right metrics, ensuring the best possible outcomes for the organization and its clients. Once alignment is achieved and accepted by all stakeholders, three key steps are vital: Revise Internal Procedures: Adapt internal processes to seamlessly integrate the chosen quality method into operations. Train Teams: Provide comprehensive training to equip teams with the skills and knowledge necessary for effective implementation. Implement Agreed Methods: Consistently apply the chosen quality method across the organization.

I would argue that the most powerful conflict in Quality Management is business urgency. You are not allowed to hold the product while out of stock situation for the market. The second one is quality decision-making. You should make quality decisions within the shortest time. People in decision-making positions should own this quality. Last but not least, every person must provide their best quality effort despite the need for a second review. Right at first time rules must follow.

All quality tools are enablers,there is no one best tool in the world.Selecting appropriate tool based on maturity level of the organization,culture,capability and what will work.Start with simple tool to create a culture. ,

Conflicts over quality methods can disrupt the improvement and assurance processes. Teams may clash over the most effective approaches for enhancing quality control, as various methods might be proposed and disputed. Resistance to change, skepticism about new techniques, or disagreements about the practicality and benefits of certain methods can hinder progress. To resolve these conflicts, it's crucial for organizations to encourage open dialogue, facilitate experimentation, and base decisions on empirical evidence, aiming to adopt the most efficient and impactful quality methods for their specific context.

Conflict over quality methods can impede effective quality management. It's essential to consider the unique needs and context of the organization when selecting a quality method. In addition to evaluating pros and cons, involving relevant stakeholders in the decision-making process can help address their concerns and preferences. Providing training and resources is key to ensuring a smooth transition to the chosen method and gaining buy-in from employees. It's also beneficial to continuously monitor and evaluate the method's effectiveness and make adjustments as needed to optimize results.

It is the responsibility of the CEO/MD to decide on the best way to achieve the quality required and of course it is also down to him that he allocates the necessary resources to effectively follow the chosen path. Resources include not only the materials, equipment, people, and technical know-how which are usually discussed but must include also the usually forgotten resource of time! Otherwise there is a strong likelihood that the project will fail.

Métodos de Qualidade – O Conflito em uma empresa ,é comum entre as equipes sendo que cada pessoa tem sua opinião, e não é todas as vezes que minha ou a sua opinião é a correta. Mas quando falamos em métodos de qualidade novos, deve ser explicado e treinado em todas as partes envolvidas, mostrando para cada um a importância da mudança, e não apenas impor a mudança devemos lembrar que trabalhamos com pessoas que desejam fazer parte do processo e entender o motivo que ela deve mudar.

Conflicts over the best methods or tools to achieve quality: - Stakeholders with differing opinions, preferences, and experiences with various quality methods (e.g., Six Sigma, Lean, ISO, TQM). - Resistance among employees to adopt new quality methods that require changes in work habits or learning new skills. - Managerial preference for a specific quality method aligned with their style or agenda. Resolving the conflict: - Objective evaluation of the pros and cons of different quality methods. - Selection of the most suitable method for the organization's context, goals, and culture. - Provision of sufficient training, support, and resources to ensure proper understanding and effective implementation of the chosen quality method.

I admit that I have been retired for over 10 years. I was a Quality Manager in an American manufacturing company and no matter what tools upper Management would implement by, using experts from other companies. we were never as effective as the company whose experts were brought in. The reason was every manufacturing company has a culture, and a fairly distinctive production process and set of environmental conditions the process works in. You have to remember tools are tools. They need to be adapted to your total operation, rather than adapt your operation to the tools.

The secret is to apply simple tools and recognized methods adapted to company's sector and environment: no need for exotic methods, if either quality level or employee background, are not sufficiently mature to opt for. What counts is result and not method. What brings satisfaction, is progress from simplicity to realistic complexity.

The Responsibility part is very crucial and Quality can only be attained if everyone works in cooperatively. Each employee ought to be aware of the significance of their responsibilities and repercussions of subpar work. Proper training, clear job responsibilities ,motivation, and real time work evaluation are crucial for achieving high quality work all along.

Interesting paradox! a) Quality department should be empowered to ensure Good Quality. b) Quality is everyone's responsibility c) If Quality is everyone's responsibility then why to have separate quality department. Basically, when we say Quality is everyone's responsibility it doesn't mean that governance (Quality department) should not exist. Take the example of traffic rules. Its everyone's responsibility to follow traffic rules. It doesn't mean there is no need of department which makes traffic rules and ensure its adherence.

Quality management is often a source of conflicts, particularly regarding who holds responsibility. To address this, a culture of quality is crucial: Cross-Departmental Approach: Designate quality leads in each department. Resolve conflicts by sharing responsibility. Training and Awareness: Educate all employees on quality. Alleviate conflicts through a common understanding. Comprehensive Quality: Extend quality to services, processes, and stakeholder interactions. Minimize conflicts by emphasizing a holistic approach. Engagement and Ownership: Empower employees to take ownership of their work's quality. Reduce conflicts by fostering collective commitment.

In any organization we are dependent on work of others. We trust our colleagues that they will do the job to the best of their abilities. e.g. their output should be at the highest level of quality possible. In this sense Quality of their work is responsibility of every team member. There also arise the question who is accountable for the overlaying approach to quality. Dedicated quality department is responsible in enabling others to do their job as effectively as possible. This can be delivered via plethora or methods. Top down or bottom up approach. Via orders / instructions / standard operating procedures or coaching / training. Or combinations of the above principles.

Conflitos de responsabilidades de qualidade ocorrem quando há falta de clareza ou sobreposição de papéis. Conflitos comuns incluem disputas entre departamentos, conflitos hierárquicos, sobreposição de funções especializadas e responsabilidades dos fornecedores. Para resolver tais conflitos, é crucial estabelecer uma estrutura clara de responsabilidades e promover uma cultura de colaboração e comunicação aberta.

Dispute over responsibility can be prevented by- (I) Establishing job description for the process owners & process participants covering responsibilities and authorities relevant to quality and empowering them to stop process in the event of defect occurrence. (II)Ensuring the independence of QAQC function & reporting relationship. (III)Authorizing staff to - Sign off first piece approval, periodic inspection & decision to continue process. (IV)Authorizing qualified and competent person for product release. (VI)Systematic resource planning during the leave /absence of designated authorities.

Conflicts over quality responsibilities can impede effective quality management. These conflicts may arise when it's unclear who is accountable for various aspects of quality control within an organization. Differences in understanding or shifting roles and responsibilities can lead to disputes over who should take the lead in ensuring quality standards are met. Resolving these conflicts requires clear delineation of roles, regular communication to align on responsibilities, and a collaborative approach to ensure everyone is working together to achieve and maintain high-quality products or services.

Conflict over quality responsibilities often arises from disagreements about who bears the responsibility for ensuring quality. These disputes can emerge when stakeholders have varying roles and expectations. Some employees may erroneously believe that quality is solely the responsibility of the quality department or management and may neglect their own quality duties. Conversely, some managers might blame employees for quality issues instead of taking accountability. To avert such conflicts, it's vital to clearly define and allocate realistic quality responsibilities to all stakeholders and hold them responsible for their performance. Encouraging a quality-centric culture that promotes collaboration and cooperation.

I totally agree with this statement. 10 years ago, when change is not so drastic, like it is now. One responsibility assignment can work for a long time. However, now change happens at the pace of year by year. An responsibility assignment can be obsolete in the next year, and conflict in respnsibilities arises more often. If they arrle not resolved correctly, The conflict will accumulate and paralyze the operation of the company.

Quality is everyone's responsibility. Managers at every level are responsible for reinforcing this. Who sets the rules depends on the size of the company.

Conflicts within a system made of management systems may have the route cause in a setup with powerful silos (units) which will look at quality management as intruder on the section. Powerful sections are difficult and you need to educate why quality management and importantly it’s management system is needed before you start to intervene to build a system. Get all on board listen before you start acting like a sheriff. Get all on board by talking about benefits to each section and to the company top brass. It takes time and education but if you keep the momentum it will work. Do the same with staff , educate, do briefings and then you will start to make it happen. Another issue is conflict between different management systems.integrate!

When we adopt inbuilt quality as a concept,it reduces dedicated resources required for quality.We need to train all employees on how to ensure the quality in all activities as a part of routine with a limited number check points.

Intresting! I believe Quality mindset is directly proportional to achieving compliance. The basic existence of Quality management Systems is to ensure that the end user is benefited, however sadly it is not yet identified to be an important aspect by many. As you righly said, many Decision makers in the Management often see to it as a regulatory requirement and some have even adopted something called "Minimum Compliance" an anomaly of its own!!. It is very important that the organizations and the Decision makers in them are convinced that Quality and Quantity are to sides of the same coin and one cannot be ignored to achieve other hence channeling the right and needed resources to maintain Quality is the need of the Industry.

For the resources allocation to Quality department, the main conflict arises when Management considers Quality department as Cost Center not the Profit Center. Apparently it seems that Quality department is not adding any value but only measuring the already created value. Although this conflict is not very sharp in regulated industries e.g., pharmaceuticals as here law makes the directives for adherence to Quality. But in other industries this conflict can be seen very intense. Note: Here Quality doesn't mean only inspection it encompasses all measures needed to ensure that manufactured products are manufactured as per desired standards.

Reflecting on my professional journey, I've learned the vital role of a robust business case, particularly when additional resources are needed. However, it's crucial to acknowledge that traditional business cases may fall short in capturing the comprehensive quantitative implications of quality failures and post-event actions. Instances like rework, work stoppages, and the time invested in investigations often remain underestimated or overlooked. The true cost of quality-related challenges extends beyond immediate expenses, impacting productivity, timelines, and overall organizational efficiency. By refining our business cases, we improve informed decision-making and sustainable business success.

Limited staff, technology, finances or expertise may hinder an organisation ability to comply and implement the Quality. To resolve this, proper planning and measurement of benefits is applicable. Proper Cost-Benefit analysis might help the organisation to allocate the correct amount of resources.

Quality of product means superior product which reflect brand image so who maintain Quality during manufacturing they are real owner of product !!

This is why it is important for Quality Managers to not report to Operations. Undoubtedly, if this is the case, Teams and Managers are going to find ways to meet their objectives. Organizations should strive to have their own Quality Department (when resources permit) with a large enough team to handle all tasks. It is popular to have personnel that shift between quality responsibilities and operations tasks; do not do this. Keep them distinct and everyone will benefit. For smaller companies that cannot afford this method, hire managers with real quality background and give them time and resources for quality training with their teams.

I see that balancing the allocation of resources among different stakeholders is indeed a common challenge. Effective planning, budgeting, and alignment with the organization's quality objectives are key to resolving such conflicts and ensuring efficient resource utilization. Regular monitoring and optimization play a significant role in achieving quality goals while managing limited resources.

Conflicts over quality feedback can hinder the improvement process. These disputes often arise when individuals or teams interpret feedback differently, leading to disagreements on the severity and significance of identified issues. In some cases, resistance to acknowledging quality problems may result in conflicts. Resolving such conflicts requires a shared understanding of the value of feedback as a tool for improvement and clear procedures for handling and acting upon feedback. Open communication and a focus on the collective goal of enhancing product or service quality can help minimize conflicts surrounding feedback.

Quality feedback must be focused on the process rather than the individual. If a process is not robust, then human error is inevitable. Good leaders understand this principle and build high performing teams by asking how the process can be improved to make the task easier.

Conflict over quality feedback can hindr progress in quality management. Establishing a structured feedback system based on objective quality indicators and promoting a positive, respectful feedback culture is essential. This can help ensure that feedback is constructive, timely, and contributes to the overall improvement of quality within an organization while minimizing conflicts and misunderstandings. I've observed that happening during the implementation of wide-scale humanitarian programs.

One thing I find helpful when providing feedback is by walking them through the Quality form and how the system works. Do a monthly/Quarterly QA Talk to the Operations. I think Process Calibrations together with the Operations, Training, Quality, and stakeholders may help to identify whether an amendment needs to be done.

Conflito Feedback de Qualidade --- A empresa deve ter sempre um plano de carreira e disponibilizar para todos os colaboradores. - O gestor deve ser treinado em passar tanto feedback bom e ruim. - A cultura da empresa deve ser de respeito com todos os funcionários, onde quando o gestor da um feedback é sempre para o crescimento do colaborador, pensando também em melhoria e inovação para o grupo.

It's never easy to accept criticism - even "constructive criticism"! and yet there is no doubt that hearing the perceptions and experiences of others can help me to grow and improve. It can be difficult to "hear" feedback due to my own filters and biases. I find it easier to write it down - see the words rather than hear any emotion and then using the words - find ways to improve.

I think, after gathering feedback it`s important that investigation, taking advantage of the results and presenting a report to the stakeholders regarding the impact of their opinions and they feel that they contribute to the development of the organization.

Feedback is directly proportional to Improvement. Without feedback, organisation will become stagnant and time will come it will not adopt in changes. Biased and unprofessional, Professional or Vague feedback is important. Create a matrix of those feedback and sort which might help you and disregard which will not help the organisation to achieve the goals and objective.

This is a little more difficult to address, as it deals with individual interpretations to specific issues. The system I apply in management is the same system with used in the Army; AAR (after action review). It's rather basic, but effective. 1. What was supposed to happen? 2. What did happen? 3. How can we improve? Start with the bad, end with the good (so you always end on a good note). In a group setting, people will take this feedback, internalize it and (hopefully) make the necessary adjustments.

Differences in Work Styles and Personalities: Employees with different personalities, interests, and work styles may get into conflicts. It takes understanding and addressing these differences to effectively collaborate as a team and resolve conflicts. When it comes to resolving disputes arising from workforce diversity, leaders are crucial. Example: When team members have different communication preferences—one values direct communication while the other values diplomacy—conflicts might emerge. In order to resolve this conflict, it is important to promote respectful communication techniques, comprehend personal preferences, and cultivate a culture of respect.

Some employees may fear change, and some managers may be reluctant to embrace improvement suggestions. To tackle this issue, it's essential to: Foster a Quality Culture: Instill a culture where quality is a core value, integral to daily operations. Encourage Creative Approaches: Emphasize innovative thinking in quality metrics, fostering inventive solutions. Embrace Stakeholder Involvement: Create an environment that welcomes and values input from all team members. Establish channels for idea submission and feedback, ensuring that everyone has a voice in the quality improvement process. Reward Contributions: Actively recognize and reward employees dedicated to quality enhancement, driving positive change.

In my experience, most of the time conflict over Quality Improvement is due to lack of understanding along with other conflicts issue highlighted by Linkedin contributors. As employees and even some managers don’t fully understand the reasons behind the proposed changes/improvement or the potential benefits that change can bring to quality management. So Effective communication is key.

Effective communication, demonstrating the benefits of improvement, and addressing concerns are key to overcoming this conflict. Involving and engaging stakeholders in the improvement process and recognizing their efforts can help foster a culture of continuous improvement and minimize resistance.

I am a fan of constructive arguments. Progress cannot be achieved solely through agreement; a certain level of conflict is necessary to challenge existing ideas, stimulate critical thinking, and drive innovation. This is also correct for a dialog between old and new. Conflict can be valuable as it brings different perspectives and ideas to the table, facilitating growth, innovation, and deeper understanding, as well as risk mitigation.

1) Recognizing the alignment between quality management and business practices is crucial for comprehensive quality management and improvement. 2) Integration of the Quality Management System with the business strategy is essential, rather than considering it an additional component. 3) Emphasizing success over labels aids in ensuring all employees comprehend the advantages of improvement.

Communication is the greatest weapon in the quality arsenal. By engaging with those who feel unheard, who feel threatened, who resist change, tremendous inroads can be made. Round Table discussions; coffee machine brainstorms; small group dialogues; shaking up the normal process can all help to hear the concerns and the challenges and find ways to improve quality so that everyone feels part of the process

10 Opportunities to enhance stakeholders engagement: 1. Define recurring issues precisely. 2. Prioritize articulating root causes. 3. Foster a proactive problem prevention culture. 4. Enhance data collection and performance indicators. 5. Develop comprehensive business cases for strategic decisions. 6. Align quality indicators with financial metrics. 7. Showcase investments' indirect benefits on customer satisfaction. 8. View quality as tools for efficiency, not just costs. 9. Establish transparent accountability for issue resolution. 10. Promote strong business ethics for a culture of integrity.

There’s a major conflict between desire for outcomes and business pressures. Quality teams are often driving to improve systems for better outcomes, yet employee supervision is emphasizing revenue generation. While those two concepts don’t have to be at odds misalignment between what quality teams are driving vs how supervision is including or not including those drivers at the employee level needs to be ironed out for optimal effectiveness.

The major problem in changes on quality control are the departments interests conflicts. When cost of changes come from their budgets. When people are more worried with their interests instead of the company.

A key consideration not only for improvement but overall quality management is to understand that quality management and business practices are aligned. The Quality Management System should be integrated with the business strategy and not be viewed as an add-on. Avoiding the labels and focusing on success helps all employees realize the benefits of improvement.

A few points: 1. Some people think QMS means it's a quality job not everyone's. Where it is the responsibility of each and every employee of an organisation. 2. Conflict over resource allocation and budget for Overall organisational Targets and KPIs. 3. Disagreements on the interpretation and implementation of quality or management standards. 4. Resistance to changes when implementing new quality processes or technologies. 5. Conflict between different departments or process owners regarding responsibility for quality. 6. Differing priorities between quality assurance and production teams. 7. Struggles over maintaining a balance between cost efficiency and product quality.

A common conflict in quality management is conflicting priorities with the stakeholders. Quality Management is not a solo act. Having a good working relationship with other disciplines and departments is critical. Those departments have their own priorities such as staffing, day-to-day operations, and other organizational challenges. So, there can be conflict with prioritizing quality improvement activities in the midst of all that. A collegial approach works best in this situation, and offering a helping hand to keep initiatives moving forward.

Especially in MEP construction, the Main Contractor is for civil related construction. MEP contractors are under Main ( Civil) contractors Here we find the float available in the duration is all consumed by Main contractor , MEP contractor is forced to speed up, which drains the resources and also affect quality

Industry don't always understand that one critical non-conformance will send ripples of doubt across the whole country and have on-going impacts to many businesses working under the system.

Understanding and meeting customer expectations is vital in quality management, and conflicts may surface when customers have varying or evolving requirements. Disagreements can stem from differences in interpreting customer feedback or adapting to shifting market trends. Organizations must continuously gather and analyze customer feedback to align their products or services with changing expectations, thereby reducing conflicts and ensuring customer satisfaction. By proactively addressing customer needs and preferences, businesses can maintain a strong competitive edge in the market.

During crisis management Risk assessment and different perspective on what is acceptable risk to company/stakeholders/customers is common source of conflict. Especially when financial interests are at play. The classic example of this conflict is the infamous case of the Ford Pinto.

-Sometimes the conflict of people's benefit or interests causes people to prevent improvement in the organization. - sometimes lack of support from senior management prevent success, of course, one of the reasons for that is weakness in gaining their trust.

This article does not explain what quality management is, why it is important or what it sets out to achieve. With each paragraph starting in exactly the same manner it is clear not much thought (yes, I understand it is written by AI!) has gone into this. In my experience, the two main issues are managers and staff not understanding what QMS and audits set out to achieve, and auditors being somewhat heavy-handed in their critiques resulting in departments living in fear of "The Spanish Inquisition".

Quality conflicts often arise as a result of differences of opinion among individuals involved in managing or evaluating quality. These conflicts stem from differing ideas about optimal quality standards and best to implement them. People in charge may come from a different background where they prefer adopting approach different from those adopted in the org, and insists that those methods are the best. Also, auditors may hold their own about the methods they believe are most effective without considering the organization's existing practices. Crucially, a lack of deep understanding of the standards and requirements to implement them effectively, leads to ineffective decision-making and difficulty achieving consensus among team members.

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." (famous quote from Albert Einstein) Problem Solving is key in Quality resolution. And a critical step in Problem Solving is Developing the Problem Statement. Or said in another way, Understanding the Problem. Because it is the first step for organizations to effectively identify and address issues using a structured approach. But one of the most common mistakes is falling into the trap of rushing and trying to find solutions without spending the time to understand the Problem. Answer the 5 fundamental questions: Where? When? Who? How? What / Affect? This step helps in gaining a holistic understanding of the problem and its context.