What is the Difference Between Quality and Reliability?
Abstract
Kirk and Fred discussing the way quality and reliability are seen as different although both may cause the product to be considered a failure in the eyes of the customers.
Key Points
Join Kirk and Fred as they discuss
Topics include:
- How we define “Quality” issues and “Reliability” in relation to failures and when poor quality results in failures.
- How it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between poor quality and failure of the product to perform well or meeting customer expectations
- How a quality department maybe a scapegoat for failures due to manufacturing variation, which may be sensitive to a particular component.
- A returned product for not meeting quality expectations should be considered a failures,
Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can join friends as they discuss reliability topics. Join us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques, to field data analysis approaches.
- Social:
- Link:
- Embed:
Show Notes
As mentioned in this podcast, here are the definitions for “Quality” and “Reliability” from Google’s define search.
RELIABILITY -the quality of being trustworthy or of performing consistently well.
To find out more about Kirk Gray and his consulting services please visit his website at www.acceleratedreliabilitysolutions.com
Click HERE to check out Kirk’s new book “Next Generation HALT and HASS: Robust Design of Electronics and Systems” , co-authored with John J. Paschkewitz
Tesla get a lot of sensor data back. But they don’t get back what annoys Tesla users in Norway: No skibox fits Tesla. People has to cut into the glassfiber of Thule-boxes to get something that works.
Hi Ole,
Great example of not meeting customer’s expectations.
Cheers,
Fred
Hi Ole,
Thanks for your comment. I agree with Fred.
Regards,
Kirk
Interesting discussion.
You guys mentioned a few key words – what do you think about this definition of quality and reliability.
Quality – The PERCEPTION from users that a thing is fit for (their) purpose.
Reliability – the ability of a thing to continue to meet a user’s requirement
Ther may be another perspective that might help, by looking through a lens of the soft system and hard systems (from systems thinking).
Which is higher quality, an (expensive) Rolex mechanical movement watch compared with a quartz watch (£5 from a market stall)?
one could argue the quartz watch keeps more accurate time… However the perception of quality is not in the time-keeping, it’s more in the ‘soft’ perception that the Rolex is a status symbol (to users where this is important), and may be better considered as an item of jewellery.
I work in information systems (focusing on asset management data) – data quality is interesting.
Hard system issues: High-quality data needs to meet timeliness, completeness, accuracy and relevance measures,
But
If a user of data that meets all of the hard system requirements, does not perceive the data to be (the soft system issues), trustworthy, understandable from their own experience or context, or presented in an ambiguous way, that data is not fit for purpose – and is therefore of low quality.
also
In information application systems, there is usually a requirement for being ‘user-friendly and intuitive to use’, however, the emergence of user experience (UX) goes further – the user needs to derive a positive emotional experience from using the application – it must be joyfull to see and use.
Perception is also a soft issue.
Best Regards
Hi Charles, excellent explanation, dare I say a quality comment. I agree that quality is really defined by the customer and the soft part often overtakes the hard engineering elements in how a customer defines quality. Years ago while at HP the quality mantra was Total Quality Experience, which expanded quality from well made/designed to include adverting, sales process, packaging, installation, customer support, etc. Apple seems to get this and HP struggled with it.
I think the understanding of the soft issues around quality and reliability is critical to being a great engineer. Hence the new emphasis on soft skills, including communication and presentation that I’m working to build into the site.
Cheers,
Fred