Volume 10, Issue 2 (February 2023), Pages: 39-49

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

 Cost of quality: Literature review, correspondence between models, and a call for a paradigm shift

 Author(s): 

 Rida Foulad ^{1, 2,} *, Saif Amellah ^{1, 2}, Samir Jebli ^{1, 2}, Amal-Oudiî Sahib ², Abdelhak Bouaziz ²

 Affiliation(s):

 ¹National Higher School of Electricity and Mechanics, Hassan II University, Casablanca, Morocco
 ²Laboratory of Mechanics, Production and Industrial Engineering, Higher School of Technology of Casablanca, Hassan II University, Casablanca, Morocco

  Full Text - PDF          XML

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7485-6886

 Digital Object Identifier: 

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2023.02.006

 Abstract:

Quality costing is a useful tool for companies. According to the literature, it has an important role in enhancing quality; strengthening competitiveness, and satisfying the customer. The aim of this article is to examine this subject from an unusual angle. We conducted a literature review of the main existing Cost of Quality (COQ) models, where we highlighted the differences and similarities in the terminologies used for COQ classifications. In addition, this work identified the criticisms of the COQ models in the literature; a comparative diagram of the main COQ models is also built to illustrate the correspondence between them. The article investigates an inductive and critical analysis approach to demonstrate the relationship between the dominant paradigm and the various COQ models; the conclusion drawn is that the main purpose of the COQ models is the profit of the shareholders at the expense of the third parties. To integrate the needs of the customer, the employee, and the environment as key stakeholders, we believe that a new COQ classification is a must. Such profound change implies a shift from the profit-centered paradigm toward a new one that should be capable to provide answers to the challenges solely for the sake of human well-being. The outcome of this study will pave the way toward a new better COQ classification. Hence, we expect the company to be at the service of human beings in a fine balance. To the best of our knowledge, the way we dealt with the COQ has never been done previously.

 © 2022 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords: Cost of quality, Profit, Model, Paradigm, Company

 Article History: Received 26 June 2022, Received in revised form 10 October 2022, Accepted 17 October 2022

 Acknowledgment 

No Acknowledgment.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

 Foulad R, Amellah S, Jebli S, Sahib AO, and Bouaziz A (2023). Cost of quality: Literature review, correspondence between models, and a call for a paradigm shift. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 10(2): 39-49

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 Fig. 1 Fig. 2 Fig. 3 Fig. 4

 Tables

 No Table

----------------------------------------------    

 References (57)

1. AFNOR (1986). X50-126: Gestion de la qualité-Guide d'évaluation des coûts résultant de la non-qualité. Association Francaise de Normalisation, Paris, France. 
2. Alglawe A, Schiffauerova A, and Kuzgunkaya O (2019). Analysing the cost of quality within a supply chain using system dynamics approach. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 30(15-16): 1630-1653. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2017.1400376   [Google Scholar]
3. Bajpai AK and Willey PC (1989). Questions about quality costs. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 6(6): 9-17. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656718910134250   [Google Scholar]
4. Bohan GP and Homey NF (1991). Pinpointing the real cost of quality in a service company. National Productivity Review, 10(3): 309-317. https://doi.org/10.1002/npr.4040100304   [Google Scholar]
5. BSI (1981). BS 6143: Guide to the economics of quality: Process cost model. British Standards Institute, London, UK.   [Google Scholar]
6. BSI (1990). BS 6143-2: Guide to the economics of quality, part 2: Prevention, appraisal and failure model. British Standards Institute, London, UK.   [Google Scholar]
7. BSI (1992). BS 6143-1: Guide to the economics of quality, part 1: Process costs model. British Standards Institute, London, UK.   [Google Scholar]
8. Campanella J (1999). Principles of quality costs: Principles, implementation, and use. In the ASQ World Conference on Quality and Improvement Proceedings, American Society for Quality, Milwaukee, USA.   [Google Scholar]
9. Carson JK (1986). Quality costing: A practical approach. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 3(1): 54-63. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb002860   [Google Scholar]
10. Chiadamrong N (2003). The development of an economic quality cost model. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 14(9): 999-1014. https://doi.org/10.1080/1478336032000090914   [Google Scholar]
11. Chopra A and Garg D (2011). Behavior patterns of quality cost categories. The TQM Journal, 23(5): 510-515. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542731111157617   [Google Scholar]
12. Cooper R and Kaplan RS (1998). The promise-and peril-of integrated cost systems. Harvard Business Review, 76(4): 109-120.   [Google Scholar]
13. Crosby PB (1980). Quality is free: The art of making quality certain. Volume 2247, Signet Press, Kolkata, India.   [Google Scholar]
14. Dale BG and Plunkett JJ (1991). Quality costing. Chapman and Hall, London, UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-3870-7   [Google Scholar]
15. Deming WE (2000). Out of the crisis. 1^st Edition, The MIT Press, Cambridge, USA.   [Google Scholar]
16. Feigenbaum AV (1961). Total quality control: Engineering and management. McGraw-Hill, New York, USA.   [Google Scholar]
17. Feigenbaum AV and Feigenbaum DS (2005). What quality means today: Leadership and management innovation must drive a comprehensive ethos of excellence. MIT Sloan Management Review, 46(2): 96-97.   [Google Scholar]
18. Freiesleben J (2004). On the limited value of cost of quality models. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 15(7): 959-969. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783360410001681908   [Google Scholar]
19. Friedman M (2007). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. In: Zimmerli WC, Holzinger M, and Richter K (Eds.), Corporate ethics and corporate governance: 173-178. Springer, Berlin, Germany. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70818-6_14   [Google Scholar]
20. Giakatis G, Enkawa T, and Washitani K (2001). Hidden quality costs and the distinction between quality cost and quality loss. Total Quality Management, 12(2): 179-190. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544120120011406   [Google Scholar]
21. Goodstadt P and Marti R (1990). Quality service at national Westminster bank‐The continual striving for excellence. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 7(4): 19-28. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656719010138812   [Google Scholar]
22. Harrington HJ (1987). Poor-quality cost. CRC Press, Boca Raton, USA. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429259128   [Google Scholar]
23. Harrington HJ (1999). Performance improvement: A total poor‐quality cost system. The TQM Magazine, 11(4): 221-230. https://doi.org/10.1108/09544789910272904   [Google Scholar]
24. He D (2010). Engineering quality systems: Cost of quality. Modern Applied Science, 4(5): 102-104. https://doi.org/10.5539/mas.v4n5p102   [Google Scholar]
25. Jaju SB, Lakhe RR, and Bhagade SS (2010). Development of empirical quality cost model for a manufacturing industry. International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, 6(1): 48-70. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPQM.2010.033884   [Google Scholar]
26. Johnson MA (1995). The development of measures of the cost of quality for an engineering unit. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 12(2): 86-100. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656719510080640   [Google Scholar]
27. Jorgenson DM and Enkerlin EM (1992). Managing quality costs with the help of activity-based costing. Journal of Electronics Manufacturing, 2(04): 153-160. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0960313192000182   [Google Scholar]
28. Juran JM (1951). Quality control handbook. McGraw Hill, New York, USA.   [Google Scholar]
29. Juran JM and Godfrey AB (1999). Juran’s quality handbook. 5^th Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, USA.   [Google Scholar]
30. Juran JM, Gryna FM, and Bingham RS (1974). Quality control handbook. 3^rd Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, USA.   [Google Scholar]
31. Kau L and Nel H (2019). Cost of quality: A review and future research directions. International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development (IJSESD), 10(3): 28-52. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJSESD.2019070103   [Google Scholar]
32. Kélada J (1992). Qualité totale: Amélioration continue et réingénierie. Éditions Quafec, Dollard-des-Ormeaux, Canada.   [Google Scholar]
33. Krishnan SK (2006). Increasing the visibility of hidden failure costs. Measuring Business Excellence, 10(4): 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1108/13683040610719290   [Google Scholar]
34. Lim C, Sherali HD, and Glickman TS (2015). Cost-of-quality optimization via zero-one polynomial programming. IIE Transactions, 47(3): 258-273. https://doi.org/10.1080/0740817X.2014.928964   [Google Scholar]
35. Machowski F and Dale BG (1998). Quality costing: An examination of knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions. Quality Management Journal, 5(3): 84-95. https://doi.org/10.1080/10686967.1997.11918817   [Google Scholar]
36. Mahmood S, Ahmed SM, Panthi K, and Kureshi NI (2014). Determining the cost of poor quality and its impact on productivity and profitability. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 4(3): 296-311. https://doi.org/10.1108/BEPAM-09-2013-0034   [Google Scholar]
37. Masser WJ (1957). The quality manager and quality costs. Industrial Quality Control, 14(6): 5-8.   [Google Scholar]
38. Merino ND (1990). Economics of quality: Choosing among prevention alternatives. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 7(3): 13-26. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656719010003433   [Google Scholar]
39. Mijoč J, Pekanov Starčević D, and Mijoč I (2014). Investigation of the relationship between contemporary cost management methods and improvement in financial performance. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 27(1): 393-413. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2014.966970   [Google Scholar]
40. Montgomery DC (2013). Introduction to statistical quality control. 7^th Edition, Wiley, Hoboken, USA.   [Google Scholar]
41. Mukhopadhyay AR (2004). Estimation of cost of quality in an Indian textile industry for reducing cost of non-conformance. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 15(2): 229-234. https://doi.org/10.1080/1478336032000149054   [Google Scholar]
42. Oakland JS (2014). Total quality management and operational excellence: Text with cases. Routledge, London, UK.   [Google Scholar]
43. Omar MK and Murgan S (2014). An improved model for the cost of quality. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 31(4): 395-418. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-05-2012-0066   [Google Scholar]
44. Porter LJ and Rayner P (1992). Quality costing for total quality management. International Journal of Production Economics, 27(1): 69-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/0925-5273(92)90127-S   [Google Scholar]
45. Rogošić A (2021). Quality cost reporting as a determinant of quality costing maturity. International Journal for Quality Research, 15(4): 1233–1244. https://doi.org/10.24874/IJQR15.04-13   [Google Scholar]
46. Sailaja A, Basak PC, and Viswanadhan KG (2014). Analysis of economics of quality in manufacturing industries. International Journal for Quality Research, 8(1): 121-138.   [Google Scholar]
47. Sandoval-Chávez DA and Beruvides MG (1998). Using opportunity costs to determine the cost of quality: A case study in a continuous-process industry. The Engineering Economist, 43(2): 107-124. https://doi.org/10.1080/00137919808903192   [Google Scholar]
48. Schiffauerova A and Thomson V (2006). A review of research on cost of quality models and best practices. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 23(6): 647-669. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656710610672470   [Google Scholar]
49. Snieska V, Daunoriene A, and Zekeviciene A (2013). Hidden costs in the evaluation of quality failure costs. Engineering Economics, 24(3): 176-186. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.24.3.1186   [Google Scholar]
50. Sörqvist L (1997). Difficulties in measuring the cost of poor quality. Measuring Business Excellence, 1(1): 38-40. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb025467   [Google Scholar]
51. Taguchi G, Chowdhury S, and Wu Y (2005). Taguchi's quality engineering handbook. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, USA. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470258354   [Google Scholar]
52. Trehan R, Sachdeva A, and Garg RK (2015). A comprehensive review of cost of quality. VIVECHAN International Journal of Research, 6(1): 70-88.   [Google Scholar]
53. Tsai WH (1998). Quality cost measurement under activity‐based costing. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 15(7): 719-752. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656719810218202   [Google Scholar]
54. Wang MT, Wang SSC, Wang SWC, and Wang ASM (2010). An introduction of COQ models and their applications. In the International Conference on Engineering, Project, and Production Management, 14: 119-128.   [Google Scholar]
55. Wilson JM, Grammich CA, Demeré BW, and Sedatole KL (2022). Determining the value of brand protection programs: Identifying and assessing performance metrics in brand protection. In: Wilson J (Ed.), Brand protection and the global risk of product counterfeits: 188-207. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839105821.00024   [Google Scholar]
56. Wood DC (2013). Principles of quality costs: Financial measures for strategic implementation of quality management. 4^th Edition, Quality Press, Welshpool, Australia.   [Google Scholar]
57. Yang CC (2008). Improving the definition and quantification of quality costs. Total Quality Management, 19(3): 175-191. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783360701600563   [Google Scholar]