{domain:"www.qualitydigest.com",server:"169.47.211.87"} Skip to main content

User account menu
Main navigation
  • Topics
    • Customer Care
    • FDA Compliance
    • Healthcare
    • Innovation
    • Lean
    • Management
    • Metrology
    • Operations
    • Risk Management
    • Six Sigma
    • Standards
    • Statistics
    • Supply Chain
    • Sustainability
    • Training
  • Videos/Webinars
    • All videos
    • Product Demos
    • Webinars
  • Advertise
    • Advertise
    • Submit B2B Press Release
    • Write for us
  • Metrology Hub
  • Training
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
Mobile Menu
  • Home
  • Topics
    • 3D Metrology-CMSC
    • Customer Care
    • FDA Compliance
    • Healthcare
    • Innovation
    • Lean
    • Management
    • Metrology
    • Operations
    • Risk Management
    • Six Sigma
    • Standards
    • Statistics
    • Supply Chain
    • Sustainability
    • Training
  • Login / Subscribe
  • More...
    • All Features
    • All News
    • All Videos
    • Contact
    • Training

Quality, Cost, and Speed: Can There Be a Balanced Decision?

Great companies should have an advocate for each

The QA Pharm
Mon, 08/08/2011 - 12:20
  • Comment
  • RSS

Social Sharing block

  • Print
Body

The truism, “Quality, cost, and speed—pick two,” was often quoted throughout my career: meaning a production company could not achieve all three ideals and therefore must choose which two out of three ideals to concentrate on;
• Sacrifice quality with low cost and high speed
• Sacrifice cost with high quality and high speed
• Sacrifice speed with high quality and low cost

ADVERTISEMENT

Does there always have to be a loser? Unfortunately, it seems to work out that way in practice.

On July 27, 2011, a special committee of Johnson & Johnson (J&J) board members issued a report in response to investor lawsuits. It cited “an adversarial relationship” between quality and production, and “an emphasis on production volume” over compliance. The committee concluded that the consumer division at J&J “should have paid more attention” to quality issues and “exercised more management oversight.”

But here’s the real kick in the pants: The members of this J&J blue-ribbon committee were quick to take themselves off the hook by saying (I’m paraphrasing): “Nobody on the J&J board told McNeil that quality should be sacrificed.”

 …

Want to continue?
Log in or create a FREE account.
Enter your username or email address
Enter the password that accompanies your username.
By logging in you agree to receive communication from Quality Digest. Privacy Policy.
Create a FREE account
Forgot My Password

Add new comment

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
Please login to comment.
      

© 2025 Quality Digest. Copyright on content held by Quality Digest or by individual authors. Contact Quality Digest for reprint information.
“Quality Digest" is a trademark owned by Quality Circle Institute Inc.

footer
  • Home
  • Print QD: 1995-2008
  • Print QD: 2008-2009
  • Videos
  • Privacy Policy
  • Write for us
footer second menu
  • Subscribe to Quality Digest
  • About Us
  • Contact Us