This paper examines quality assurance (QA) as a comprehensive set of activities manufacturers use to meet customer expectations, and distinguishes it from quality control (QC) as a narrower subset. The paper explains the graded approach to QA—a cost-effective strategy where quality specifications are tailored to project-specific needs rather than applied uniformly. Through examples from the Department of Energy and B&D Industries Inc., the paper demonstrates how organizations implement tiered quality levels based on risk, complexity, and mission criticality. The analysis highlights two major benefits: reduced QA costs and improved alignment between quality specifications and organizational objectives.
Quality assurance (QA) is a term used to refer to the entire set of activities undertaken by a manufacturer to ensure that a product or service, at the very least, meets the expectations of customers (Webber & Wallace, 2012). Quality control (QC) is a component of QA—it refers to the specific activities that are taken to ensure that a deliverable service or product meets the specific needs and requirements of the customer (Webber & Wallace, 2012). Checking calibrations, conducting tests and inspections, and checking drawings and calculations for errors are all part of quality control.
QA, on the other hand, is broader. It includes QC and starts way before the product is developed. Some of the activities that the manufacturer would conduct as part of QA include conducting requirement analyses to assess the appropriateness of the proposed product to potential stakeholders, reviewing the initiation and planning phases of product development to take into account the findings of requirement analyses, screening potential vendors and suppliers for best value, putting in place controls to ensure that the execution plan is properly followed, identifying and correcting deficiencies, and conducting quality audits.
From the above list of sampled activities, it is quite evident that quality assurance is a costly affair that is perhaps beyond the reach of small manufacturers. It is for this exact reason that manufacturers adopt a graded approach to quality assurance—where quality specifications are planned and conducted only to the degree necessary to meet the current project's specific needs (EPA Quality System, 2014).
In other words, a graded approach recognizes that different products will require different quality specifications. As such, manufacturers could cut down on quality assurance costs by only implementing those activities that are relevant and extremely vital to the current project, given its intended use (EPA Quality System, 2014). In a graded approach to quality assurance, therefore, the manufacturer will either consider the entire set of possible quality-assurance activities but only implement those that are necessary to ensure the product meets the needs, requirements, and specifications of customers, or implement all the quality requirements but vary the methods of implementation based on the project's complexity, cost, or importance to the organization's mission (EPA Quality System, 2014).
The Office of Environmental Management and Energy Facilities Contractors in the Department of Energy (DOE) employs a graded approach in the procurement of deliverables to be used in the execution of client programs. Its quality specifications in this regard include the following: procuring deliverables that meet the performance specifications as well as established requirements; evaluating potential vendors based on the specified criteria so as to obtain maximum value; and putting in place measures to ensure that approved vendors keep providing acceptable deliverables (DOE, 2008).
The department of energy requires all job-related purchases made by approved contractors to meet the aforementioned quality requirements. The office, however, varies the methods used to implement the three requirements and the extent of documentation based on the inherent risk of the program under implementation and its degree of importance to the office's overall mission (DOE, 2008).
B&D Industries Inc., a U.S.-based prime contractor offering repair, maintenance, and construction services, also uses a graded three-tier quality assessment approach to determine the type of controls to apply. Quality level 1 is the most rigorous, with the tightest controls, and deals with constructions that involve standard hazards such as nuclear material. Quality level 2 is not as rigorous, with less stringent controls, and it largely deals with less harmful components including, but not limited to, high voltage and asbestos. Finally, quality level 3 has only responsible and reasonable controls, dealing with everyday activities that do not pose significant hazards.
A graded approach is applied "to select the controls that will be applied to project activities consistent with their importance to safety, cost, schedule, contractual requirements, and mission success" (B&D Industries Inc., 2011, n.pag.). Towards this end, projects that are perceived as being more crucial to safety and more vital to the achievement of the organization's mission are subjected to tighter controls (quality levels 1 and 2), whereas the not-so-important ones are subjected to the less stringent quality level 3.
The core advantage of using a graded approach is that it is more cost-effective than a one-fits-all approach. Quality management planning provides a useful example of how a graded approach could be used to cut down on QA costs. Consider two programs undertaken by the same organization—one that is fully financed by a large grant from the state administration and another smaller program that is financed by a small grant from, say, a voluntary donor. If the organization implemented a one-fits-all approach to quality, it would subject both projects to the same quality activities, regardless of their size and complexity differences.
However, under a graded approach, the organization would carry out a more comprehensive quality analysis and documentation for the larger program and a less comprehensive analysis for the smaller program. This would mean that the total cost spent on QA would be considerably less.
A second benefit derived from using a graded approach is that it provides the flexibility necessary to develop and design quality specifications that are in line with the objectives of the activity, as well as the needs of both the organization and the customer (B&D Industries Inc., 2011). In other words, a graded approach essentially assists organizations in designing more effective QA management plans.
Quality assurance collectively covers all the activities that an organization, manufacturer, or service-provider undertakes to ensure that their product or service meets customer expectations. It encompasses a wide range of activities including conducting requirement analyses, reviewing the initiation and planning phases, screening potential vendors and suppliers, and identifying and correcting deficiencies. With all these activities, QA poses as a costly process, and it is for this reason that organizations will often adopt a graded approach to QA, where projects are subjected to quality controls only to the degree necessary to meet the specific needs of the organization and the customer.
You’re 96% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.