Comparison of Quality Philosophies - Research Paper Example

While Deming has stressed on the importance of worker involvement and statistical quality control, Juran’s emphasis focuses more on quality planning, measurement and control. On the other hand, Crosby relies on zero tolerance to defects, cost of quality and organizational motivation to explain quality management (Koontz, 2006). In terms of overlapping arguments, all three experts emphasize the importance of defect prevention and mitigation over detection besides promoting quality as a strategic competitive tool for organizations.

Each also explains the crucial role of management in total quality improvement. However, there are numerous differences in their approaches over aspects such as the definition of quality, quality measurement, standards, roles of management and determining potential targets for quality improvements. Despite their unique arguments, my research has led me to conclude that Deming’s philosophy offers the best overall approach to quality management in comparison to other thinkers. The reasons for arriving at this conclusion are discussed below.

Deming defines quality as a state with ‘zero defects’ whereby similar products or services have incomparable or minimal variations. Thus, quality according to Deming is a visionary pursuit towards a product with no deficiencies, which ultimately leads to total satisfaction for the customer. On the other hand, Juran and Crosby define quality as ‘fitness for use’ and ‘conformance to requirements’ (Buhler, 2007). While both definitions are customer-centric and view quality as a set of criteria defined by the customer’s expectations, there is no attention to the fact that the customer’s requirements may themselves contain potential deficiencies.

In other words, Deming’s theory suggests that companies should evaluate the product for potential deficiencies and try to be innovative in identifying hidden vulnerabilities. By taking a comparatively restricted approach as suggested by Juran and Crosby, firms are in an inhibited position to service their customers (Migliore, 2009). Deming also deviates from the traditional approach by analyzing every aspect from the perspective of quality. He suggests that quality should be the benchmark, which firms should seek to optimize, which will ultimately lead to better productivity, competitive advantage and lower costs (Paulson, 2008).

In contrast, Juran and Crosby focus on improving parameters such as productivity, innovation, cost reduction and defects as drivers for improving quality. Thus, quality serves as the ultimate objective in their case, which is estimated by the collective realization of these parameters (Hartman, 2005). While utilizing statistical techniques such as those suggested by Juran