The aim is to find the solutions to the problems that the Company A met in the implementation of TQ to suggest alternative paths by assimilating the practiced quality management systems with others such as lean manufacturing, as introduced at MIT for producing quality care efficiently, Six Sigma including FEMA for reducing defects to near-zero along with ISO standards.
Coming back to the question above, the most likely approach used for quality management systems and processing at a time when progress regarding improvement had “plateaued” was to put on hold further development until issues on the priority list were sorted out. This was also the expert review of the investigative parent company of Company A. Earlier, the company A had taken certain one-off advances which have provided leverages but setting them aside, otherwise the approach of management had been irregular and doubtful.
The management applied different parameters of saying something and doing differently such as quality was given the topmost priority in discussions but the actual preference was to reach production targets irrespective of quality considerations. Processes were never completed for initiating new product leaving the scope of improvement in new product at later stages of manufacturing, which affected the cost factor leading to reduced returns. In this regard, it is important to know the stage of the new product where corrections are made as a new product at definition phase costs 1$, which if rectified at production stage costs 1000$. Being a manufacturing unit, the emphasis remains on meeting quality requirements, reliability, and process-control besides cost reduction while attending to engineering and manufacturing aspects of the products. In the given context, the Company A committed such errors more often, thus, increasing the cost of meeting quality benchmarks.