Rising Economic Power of Quality

THE RISING ECONOMIC
POWER OF QUALITY
How Quality Ensures Growth
and Enhances Profitability
IN ASSOCIATION WITH
CONTENTS
1. FOREWORD.....................................................................................................................................4
2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................................6
3. METHODOLOGY..............................................................................................................................8
4. KEY FINDINGS...............................................................................................................................10
5. QUALITY DRIVES GROWTH ......................................................................................................11
6. QUALITY CHALLENGES ...............................................................................................................16
7. MAKING QUALITY SUCCEED ....................................................................................................23
8. HARNESSING THE POWER OF QUALITY DATA......................................................................29
9. QUALITY IN THE DIGITAL ERA....................................................................................................36
10. ACTION ITEMS .........................................................................................................................40
11. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.............................................................................................................42
3 | THE RISING ECONOMIC POWER OF QUALITY: HOW QUALITY ENSURES GROWTH AND ENHANCES PROFITABILITY COPYRIGHT © 2017 FORBES INSIGHTS
FOREWORD
Consumers today have a variety of information available that influences their buying habits
and can greatly impact an organization’s bottom line. Entire industries have shifted to accom-
modate the informed customer, with disruptive innovators relying on new business models and
technologies to give them a competitive edge. Quality is an essential ingredient to the success
of these industries, and can turn uncertainty into profitability.
Thriving in this challenging era of constant change requires infusing quality thinking into
every process across every part of the enterprise. Organizations succeeding in their markets
have learned to deliver world-class quality through products, process and people—even when
products and services need to be delivered almost immediately. They harness the enormous
economic potential of quality management to attain leadership within their industries.
These advancing organizations understand that—because of customer demand—responsive-

ness and change is vital to competitiveness. They also transform to design, build and ship
products quickly to meet the needs of its customers. Once products are sold and shipped, the
relationships with customers continue through ongoing monitoring and maintenance.
Organizations with established performance excellence programs in place see more significant,
direct benefits as a result of their efforts than their less-developed counterparts. Companies
with mature quality systems proactively engage their workforces, partners and customers in the
continuous improvement of products and services.
These are among the types of organizations that have realized an increase in revenues and have
boosted their bottom line. It’s their outlook and incorporation of quality throughout the com-
pany that have trickled through to their customers that provide repeat business because of the
value of a product or service.
These are the companies all organizations should aspire to be like. Where do you fit on the
spectrum of companies reaping the financial benefits of enterprise-wide quality? How can qual-
ity benefit your business?
Eric Hayler
Board of Directors Chair, ASQ
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In this report, Forbes Insights, in association with ASQ, a global community
of quality professionals, explores the results of a survey of 1,869 senior
executives and quality professionals, focusing on the links between quality
efforts and corporate performance, as well as the evolving business value
of quality.
The research reveals that top-level executives and quality professionals see a direct connection
between the success of their continuous improvement or performance excellence initiatives
and the success of their organizations as a whole. Close to half of all survey respondents say
their quality efforts have resulted in increased profitability and have enhanced important key
functions across their organizations.
The research examines the state of quality maturity, and the returns of continuous improve-
ment efforts as measured against the bottom line. More than one-third of enterprises,
36%, regard themselves as “established” quality organizations, meaning quality is pervasive
throughout their organization and culture. Another two in five—classified as “developing”—
are moving forward with quality efforts, which currently may be spotty. Twenty-five percent
currently have ineffectual or nonexistent quality efforts (Fig. 1). It should also be noted that
within the final group classified as “siloed or struggling,” 5% reported no quality efforts at all.
For the purposes of this survey, we defined quality initiatives as

efforts to promote or implement quality, continuous improvement,
performance excellence and any related activities.
Figure 1 How Respondents Rate
Their Quality Maturity
36% Established: Throughout this report, we examine the

trends, best practices and attitudes of the
Our organization is considered the best
established organizations versus those whose
in the industry and a benchmark; we
senior executives and quality professionals
recognize quality as a strategic asset and com-
report they are still developing quality cul-
petitive differentiator; we have strong metrics
tures and those who are still struggling to
in place to measure costs and benefits; contin-
initiate comprehensive performance excel-
uous improvement or performance excellence
lence efforts within their organizations.
efforts are directly tied to customer satisfac-
tion and business performance; training and
In addition to the survey, Forbes Insights
education is widespread, and available to all
conducted in-depth interviews with
employees, contractors and partners.
top executives and thought leaders (see
Acknowledgments). They note that to suc-
39 % Developing: ceed, quality initiatives need to be woven

into every part of the organization, irre-
Our quality efforts are developing within busi- spective of industry. The shift to digital
ness units or departments, but they lack a enterprises is bound to transform organiza-
cohesive strategic focus; we may have strong tions’ approaches and perceptions of quality
quality training programs, but they’re not nec- or continuous improvement—from a focus
essarily available to all employees. on products to more emphasis on brand
value, data and software delivery. As of
today, there is little consensus on digital, as
25% Siloed/Struggling: most quality professionals have not incor-
porated digital initiatives into their scope of
Our quality efforts are siloed within specific
responsibilities. The report closes with a for-
areas of the organization; potential benefits
ward look at this next frontier—quality in
are not fully understood or communicated
the digital era.
by management. Or: We don’t have ongoing
formal quality, continuous improvement or
performance excellence efforts in our organiza-
tion at this time.
While these three categories will be used through-

out the report to compare the experiences and
attitudes of companies in various stages of qual-
ity maturity, it’s important to note that these
are self-designated categories. In many cases
though, the data supports the maturation of the
quality groups.
METHODOLOGY
The insights and commentary found in this report are derived from
both a survey and qualitative interviews. Partnering with ASQ, Forbes
Insights conducted a global survey of 1,869 senior executives and quality
professionals in March 2017. Of this group, 1,000 came from Forbes’
executive database and 869 from ASQ’s database. For identification
purposes, Forbes respondents are labeled as “senior executives” in this
report and ASQ respondents are labeled as “quality professionals.”
What is your title?
Quality
Senior Executives
Professionals
Senior Manager, Manager or 0% 44%
below
SVP/VP 24% 2%
Chief Executive Officer 18% 4%
Chief Information Officer 17% 0%
Chief Financial Officer 12% 0%
Director 0% 13%
Chief Marketing Officer 10% 0%
Other C-level Executive 8% 1%
Chief Quality Officer 4% 5%
Chief Operating Officer 7% 1%
Other Quality Professionals 0% 30%
What is your organization's annual revenue?
Which of the following best describes your industry?
Where is your organization headquartered?
KEY FINDINGS
Quality has a direct impact on profit growth. Organizations embracing continuous
improvement or performance excellence in a significant way are more likely to see
higher levels of productivity than those who are lagging in quality efforts. The areas of
the business that benefit the most from quality initiatives include boosting customer
growth and sales, followed by efficiency gains. Areas most likely to be touched by
quality initiatives include operations, customer service and production.
Workforce preparedness and outdated processes are the greatest quality issues
faced by organizations. Ongoing quality issues are hurting competitiveness and cut-
ting into revenue. Negative quality issues are also proving to be a productivity sink,
taking time away from employees’ jobs. The amount of time consumed with quality
issues is rising.
A spirit of collaboration and open communication is more essential to quality suc-

cess than other initiatives. Stakeholders need to know they can speak up as issues
arise, or if they have improvement ideas. While quality encompasses a broad vari-
ety of activities and programs, the most common denominators include collaboration
and risk management. External forces such as customer demand are pushing quality.
Continuous improvement and superior delivery to customers are the top values that
define today’s quality efforts.
Quality measurement is widespread, but more data is needed. Less than one-fourth
of enterprises have extensive metrics for their quality efforts in place. The ability to
obtain the right data at the right time is a continuing issue. Quality data that is available
is widely distributed, and a majority of organizations have even opened up such data
to their workforces. Customer satisfaction is the metric most often leveraged.
Digital transformation means new ways to approach quality. It makes speed essen-
tial in the ability to deliver quality outcomes, as well as to measure and report results.
QUALITY DRIVES GROWTH
Quality may be the essential ingredient that transforms today’s uncertainty
into profitability. Entire industries are being disrupted by startups or innovators
with new business models and technologies. Rapid time to market is critical
to competitiveness, and there is enormous pressure to design, build and
ship products at blazing speeds.
Thriving in this challenging era of change requires infusing quality thinking into every process
across every part of the enterprise. Organizations succeeding in their markets have learned to
deliver world-class quality through products, processes and people—even when products and
services need to be delivered within milliseconds. They harness the enormous economic poten-
tial of quality management to attain leadership of their respective markets.
Close to half of senior executives and quality professionals in this survey report that their qual-
ity efforts have increased profitability. A total of 47% attribute profitability growth to their
continuous improvement efforts. One in five credit significant growth, exceeding 5% in the
most recent year (Fig. A-1).
Figure A-1
How Quality Programs Affected Bottom
Lines (Profitability) in Most Recent Fiscal Year
Increased profitability by more than 10% 8%
Increased profitability 6%-10% 12%
Increased profitability 1%-5% 27%
Total Increased 47%
No discernable impact 28%
Decreased profitability 1%-5% 4%
Decreased profitability 6%-10% 2%
Decreased profitability by more than 10% 3%
Don’t know/not sure 15%
Note: May not add to 100% due to rounding
When looking at the reported annual revenue growth of respondents’ organizations, those in
the established category in terms of quality were more likely to report significant growth than
their less-advanced counterparts. Twenty-six percent of the established quality organizations
experienced regular year-to-year growth exceeding 6%, versus 19% of the developing category
(Fig. A-2).
How Quality Initiatives Affected Bottom Lines (Profitability)
Figure A-2
in Most Recent Fiscal Year - By Quality Maturity Level
(Percentage reporting growth greater than 6% growth per year)
Figure A-3
Financial Impact of Quality on Key
Business Functions Over Past 5 Years
(Percentage rating impact "6" and "7" on a scale of 1-7,
with 7 meaning "significant positive impact")
Most of the benefits of quality tie into cus-
Figure A-4 Enterprise Scope
tomer satisfaction. More than one-third of of Quality Efforts
all survey respondents report their organi-
zations’ performance excellence efforts have
had a significant, positive impact on cus-
tomer revisits over the past five years. Thirty
percent have seen positive results in their
earnings and profits over a five-year period,
and a similar number say their quality efforts
have played a role in boosting sales (Fig.
A-3).
Survey respondents who rated their orga-

nizations’ quality initiatives as established
are more likely to have experienced the
wide range of benefits seen from their qual-
ity initiatives. Close to half, 45%, report
quality has boosted customer revisits, com-
pared with 34% of developing organizations
and less than 24% of the siloed or strug-
gling organizations. Close to two in five
established quality organizations also have
experienced growth in earnings and prof-
its, contrasted with about one-quarter of
developing and less than one-fifth of siloed/
struggling organizations.
Quality management now extends across the

enterprise, from production floors to front
offices. Two in five see quality as a cross-
enterprise initiative, ranking their quality
management programs at or near enterprise 39% Total: 6/7
quality strategy (rating the enterprise scope
of their efforts as a “6” or a “7” on a scale of
1 to 7, as shown in Fig. A-4). Another seg-
ment of respondents in the survey, 45%, rate
their enterprise focus moderately, with a “4”
or “5” on the 1-7 scale. At the lower end of
the scale, 17% indicate their enterprise scope
rates lowest, either a “1,” “2,” or “3.” The
trends and attitudes of the leaders in this cat-
egory, those with the highest enterprise-scale
ratings, map closely to the established group
self-identified within this survey, shown in
Figure 1 in the Executive Summary.
Almost 60% of all survey respondents report their quality management efforts involve operations,
and 52% say customer service is part of their quality efforts. Half say quality is part of their pro-
duction efforts—the traditional home of quality management over the years (Fig. A-5)
Figure A-5 Top 10 Business Areas Touched by Quality Initiatives

(Percentage rating impact "6" and "7" on a scale of 1-7,
with 7 meaning "high impact")
Siloed/
Total Established Developing
Struggling
Operations 59% 66% 59% 48%
Customer 52% 60% 52% 41%
service/support
Production 51% 56% 53% 39%
Partner/vendor 42% 53% 40% 29%
relations
Research and
41% 51% 40% 29%
development
Training 42% 52% 40% 31%
Procurement/ 39% 47% 39% 28%
purchasing
Sales/marketing 38% 51% 35% 25%
Human resources/
human capital 39% 50% 37% 25%
Supplier 40% 48% 40% 27%
management
“Our mission is to strive to improve the health and quality of life for the people and communi-
ties we serve by providing world-class service and patient-centered care,” says Mark P. Jarrett,
chief quality officer, senior vice president and associate chief medical officer at Northwell
Health in the New York metro area. Quality at Northwell means more than delivery of quality
services—it’s about “quality of life,” he states. “It is not just reducing hospital-acquired con-
ditions, but broader and patient-centric. Our success is defined by these improvements in the
health and quality of life in our communities.”
The definition of quality has evolved in recent times in a similar fashion across a broad range of
industries, observes Michael Gravier, associate professor of marketing and global supply chain
management at Bryant University in Rhode Island. “We are at a tipping point where the defi-
nition of quality is making a major shift to incorporate the consumer,” he says, noting that in
previous eras, quality was focused on operational concerns, such as defects per million. “The
funny thing about quality is that we usually defined it based upon where it wasn’t.”
Most established quality organizations say their initiatives already encompass a range of key
corporate functions—including operations, customer service, production, partner/vendor rela-
tions, research and development, training, and sales and marketing. By contrast, only three
of these functions are covered in a majority of developing organizations, and none are promi-
nently figured in siloed/struggling organizations.
Quality Growth as Seen by Senior Executives vs. Quality Professionals
Throughout this report, we explore the dif- on the other hand, are more focused on qual-
ferences in experiences and attitudes between ity at the working level, and are more likely
senior executives and quality professionals. to see firsthand whether they are succeeding
To a large extent, these differences in per- or require rethinking or re-engineering.
spectives are attributable to the job roles of
members of the two groups. Senior executives With this more expansive view of their enter-
are tasked with looking at the bigger pic- prises’ progress, senior executives are more
ture, and marshaling appropriate resources likely to consider their organizations’ quality
from appropriate corners of their organiza- initiatives to be established, meaning contin-
tions to deliver bottom-line results, be it on uous improvement is embedded across their
an annual or quarterly basis. The term “qual- enterprises, and is part of most or all pro-
ity” may not appear in their job description, cesses. Forty-four percent of senior executives
but they understand that it is the foundation consider their organizations to be established,
of everything they do. Quality professionals, versus 27% of quality professionals (Fig. A-6).
Figure A-6
How Respondents Rate Their
Quality Maturity – By Job Roles
QUALITY CHALLENGES
Continuous improvement and performance excellence do not happen
spontaneously, are not propelled by simple executive decree, and are not
contained within a single department or function. Such efforts need to
be deeply embedded within the work styles and mindsets of employees
and managers across the organization. On an assembly line within a
quality-driven enterprise, employees know they can throw a switch to
stop production if they see an anomaly—even if it is not in their area of
responsibility. When engaging directly with customers, employees and
managers understand they are empowered to call on any organizational
resources that are necessary to deliver a superior experience. When
working with teams and business executives, employees and managers
feel free to speak up and propose new ways to handle processes.
The challenge is for these employees and managers to have enough of the proper training, skills
and awareness to be able to see continuous improvement initiatives through, especially as they
are embedded into more extensive parts of their enterprises. The ability to provide and ensure
such training is the greatest concern for business leaders and quality professionals. A majority,
54%, cite employee competence for future needs as their most vexing yet-to-be-resolved quality
challenge, followed by outdated, rigid or slow processes. There is also an element of the digital
enterprise, with a majority also concerned about quality in their data (Fig. B-1).
Figure B-1
Respondents’ Top 10 Most Vexing
Yet-to-Be-Resolved or Ongoing Quality Issues
Siloed/
Struggling
Employee competence
for future needs
54% 55% 52% 55%
Outdated, rigid or
slow internal/ 53% 50% 52% 59%
operational processes
Need for greater
data quality
52% 53% 52% 50%
Quality issues
from suppliers
51% 54% 51% 47%
Wasted or
unaccounted resources
46% 48% 45% 45%
Employee turnover 45% 46% 48% 41%
Delays from suppliers in
product or service delivery
42% 47% 40% 37%
Information technology
shortfalls/buggy software
41% 41% 41% 38%
Changing standards
and regulations
41% 46% 41% 33%
Lack of leadership support 40% 34% 37% 55%
To a great degree, established quality organizations suffer from many of the same issues as their
less-developed counterparts—they may just be taking more proactive measures to handle the
challenges. A majority of all survey respondents, 54%, report identifying or securing employee
competence to make quality initiatives successful is a major issue, which is the same level as
their less-advanced counterparts. Established quality organizations are also more likely to be
facing quality issues that arise with suppliers—54%, versus 47% of lagging organizations. This
may be due to heightened awareness and standards for quality that established organizations
bring to the table.
Often, addressing quality issues means mar- often arduous for customers to follow up with
shaling employees to dig deep and collaborate phone calls. “We spent a lot of time on the
on challenges. For one company, growth in phone, listening to customers, looking at our
product sales resulted in calls to the cus- process flow and what we needed to empower
tomer call center on a proportionate basis. care reps to resolve in one call. That meant
The company was challenged with either con- training for the reps, and giving them more
tinually increasing staff to its call center, or authority to resolve an issue immediately—to
taking a deep dive to explore ways to reduce give them the tools they need to help their cus-
the need for customer calls. “We were grow- tomers.” As a result of this concerted effort, 18
ing so quickly, the alternatives were to just months after the effort was initiated, the com-
keep throwing lots of people at our care cen- pany has customer response metrics with the
ter, or go in and do an improvement process same size team and more sales. “We answer
and find out what’s going on,” says William 85% to 90% of our calls within 20 seconds,
McMahon, chief operating officer of Nautilus, and our first-time resolution rates have gone
Inc., a provider of fitness equipment. up 500%,” McMahon says.
The company discovered that many issues Eighty-four percent of all survey respondents
arose from damage that occurred to its fitness agree that these issues are, to some extent,
equipment during shipping. In response, the affecting the overall competitiveness of their
company’s product designers set out to create organizations (Fig. B-2.) One in five say these
packaging that would resist damage during issues are eating away at more than 10% of
the shipping process. At the same time, it was their organization’s revenue (Fig. B-3).
Figure B-2
Believe Yet-to-Be-Resolved or Ongoing Quality
Issues Affecting Overall Competitiveness?
Figure B-3
Estimated Annual Business Cost of Yet-to-Be-
Resolved or Ongoing Quality-Related Issues
Siloed/
Struggling
Less than 1%
of revenue
14% 18% 12% 9%
1%-5%
of revenue
30% 32% 30% 27%
6%-10%
of revenue
21% 22% 20% 19%
11%-15%
of revenue
9% 8% 10% 9%
16%-20%
of revenue
6% 5% 8% 6%
More than 20%
of revenue
5% 4% 4% 7%
More than 10%
20% 17% 22% 22%
of revenue
Don't know 15% 10% 15% 22%

Both internally facing and outwardly facing continuous improvement initiatives should have
a common foundation, says Bryant University’s Gravier. “The entire organization should be
focused on its end market. Few leaders have mastered the art of orienting their organizational
cultures to achieve a holistic focus on the end market. This is why in most cases, quality tends
to reside in operations, particularly in manufacturing companies: The product provides a tan-
gible focus that is easy to measure and assess, using methodologies and systems specific to
manufacturing operations, from a statistical control approach.
“This can lead companies to an internal focus, which can be dangerous, because it can then
lead to underserving the market,” Gravier continues. “Companies like McDonald’s, Toyota and
Apple have consistent records for integrating external quality with internal quality, showing
that it can be done, although even in these companies, the internal and external focuses tend
to be managed separately and with different methodologies. But they have mastered the art of
dialogue between internal and external quality methods by having a pervasive, market-oriented
culture—a powerful competitive tool when paired with rigorous internal quality programs.”
Even the most advanced quality organizations are wrestling with ongoing quality issues, as
indicated by at least 41% of this group. A majority of siloed and struggling organizations, 56%,
concur they are being hampered by quality concerns. The potential costs of inadequate quality
are also closely even, regardless of how well developed a quality culture may be.
Quality issues are taking time away from employees’ jobs, the survey shows. Thirty-seven per-
cent state that more than 10% of employees’ time is consumed in addressing yet-to-be-resolved
quality issues each week (Fig. B-4). In established quality organizations, this is less of a prob-
lem—33% see quality issues taking up more than 10% of staff members’ time, compared with
42% of their lagging counterparts.
Amount of Line Employee or Staff Time Spent Addressing

Figure B-4
Yet-to-Be-Resolved or Ongoing Quality-Related Issues per Week
Siloed/
Struggling
Less than 5% 33% 39% 31% 29%
5%-10% 23% 22% 26% 20%
11%-25% 20% 17% 21% 22%
26%-50% 10% 9% 10% 14%
More than 50% 6% 7% 6% 7%
More than 10% 37% 33% 37% 42%
Don't know/
unsure
7% 5% 7% 9%
Overall, the amount of time consumed with quality issues is rising. Close to half of all survey
respondents, 44%, say the amount of time employees spend addressing unresolved or ongoing
quality issues has increased over the past three years (Fig. B-5).
Figure B-5
How Amount of Staff Time for Addressing Unresolved or Ongoing
Quality Issues per Week Has Changed Over Past 3 Years
Siloed/
Struggling
Increased significantly 14% 17% 12% 12%
Increased moderately 31% 29% 32% 31%
Increased= 44% 46% 44% 42%
Has not changed 27% 26% 29% 28%
Decreased moderately 15% 17% 16% 13%
Decreased significantly 8% 9% 7% 7%
Don't know/unsure 5% 3% 4% 10%
Quality Challenges as Seen by Senior Executives

vs. Quality Professionals
Senior executives are more attuned to the challenges digital technology adoption and disrup-
tion are posing to quality efforts than quality professionals. Most executives see data itself as
an essential part of continuous improvement. Sixty-eight percent of senior executives see data
quality as an issue affecting their organization’s quality delivery, a number that is double that of
quality professionals. Even more strikingly, a majority of executives say online and digital secu-
rity is a major quality challenge, a concern shared by only 9% of quality professionals. Quality
professionals, however, regard outdated and slow processes as their biggest challenge (Fig. B-6).
Senior executives also voice much greater concern than their quality professional counterparts
about the overall customer experience online as requiring quality thinking (49% versus 8%).
The ability of competitors to replicate products and services—potentially of lower quality—also
weighs more heavily on the minds of senior executives than on quality professionals (51% ver-
sus 7%).
Figure B-6
Respondents’ Most Vexing Yet-to-Be-Resolved
or Ongoing Quality Issues – By Job Roles
Quality
Senior Executives
Professionals
Need for greater
data quality
68% 33%
Employee competence
for future needs
67% 39%
Employee turnover 61% 28%
Quality issues
from suppliers
58% 43%
Wasted or
unaccounted resources
57% 33%
Delays from
suppliers in product 57% 25%
or service delivery
Outdated, rigid or
slow internal/ 55% 50%
operational processes
Online/digital security vulnerabilities 54% 9%
Information technology shortfalls/
buggy software
53% 26%
Communication issues
with customers
52% 21%
Counterfeit products
in the marketplace
51% 7%
Changing standards and regulations 49% 31%
Subpar user or customer
experience online
49% 8%
Lack of leadership support 45% 35%
Inadequate budget allocations 45% 30%
Lack of general
management skills
43% 32%
Lack of understanding
customer needs
41% 24%
Other 0% 5%
None of the above 1% 2%
MAKING QUALITY SUCCEED
Continuous improvement and performance excellence comes in many
different forms and flavors. Some organizations may have a formal quality
program or quality department that provides guidance and serves as
a center of excellence. But quality also is seen across many other types
of endeavors as well. It is seen in corporate management hierarchies,
where decision making is pushed down to all levels of organizations and
employees are empowered to take actions as they see appropriate. It is
seen in customer engagements, in which efforts are made to remove all
barriers to a superior experience.
The survey also sought to define the types of efficiencies and things you can measure, and
programs or initiatives that are considered the other half of that internal culture is creat-
part of a quality effort, and it found qual- ing that environment where you can talk about
ity is taking many forms across enterprises. what’s wrong if something’s wrong. It’s really
The most often-cited approach is through okay to talk about something that’s wrong.”
encouragement of employee participation and
collaboration, employed by 67%. More than two-thirds also define their
quality effort through a risk management
Collaboration—enhanced by risk man- program. Nearly two-thirds have built their
agement—is a critical enabler of successful performance excellence programs around the
continuous improvement. It “requires a cul- primary tools used within the discipline—
ture that drives the willingness to be open; such as cause-and-effect diagrams, checklists,
and talk about what’s actually happened, ver- control charts, histograms and Pareto charts.
sus people being siloed and being afraid to Data analytics—which enables better scru-
say things,” says Nautilus’ McMahon. “We tiny of the results of these efforts—also plays
expect people to speak up, even if it’s not a large part in quality efforts, employed at
in their area. We’ve fostered that environ- close to two-thirds of participating organiza-
ment, so a lot of it is about Pareto charts and tions (Fig. C-1).
Figure C-1 Top 10 Characteristics of Enterprise Quality Efforts
Siloed/
Struggling
Encouragement of employee
input and collaboration
67% 74% 67% 57%
Risk management program 66% 74% 65% 56%
Use of primary tools—cause and
effect diagrams, checklists, control 65% 69% 66% 60%
charts, histograms, Pareto charts
Results measured through
data analytics
64% 72% 61% 56%
Quality policies originated and
managed by departments or 64% 69% 65% 54%
business units
Formal quality planning and
assurance program
62% 66% 61% 55%
End-to-end customer experience 58% 70% 53% 47%
Enterprise quality policy, published
and communicated
56% 63% 56% 46%
Services delivery excellence 56% 65% 55% 45%
Business process re-engineering
or redesign efforts
55% 62% 55% 46%
“A well-oiled machine produces the best, Equally critical parts of any continuous
most consistent output, so it’s critical to make improvement effort are those policies and prac-
sure that your internal team, processes and tices that are being facilitated at the individual
systems are streamlined—every employee and departmental level as well. “We do not have
department should serve a role in improving a company-wide management program since
the customer experience and driving business management qualities and procedures tend to
growth,” says Craig Malloy, CEO at Lifesize, differ by department, but we have set up a com-
a conferencing technology provider. “We have pany-wide expectation of thinking outside of
united every department’s efforts behind the the box,” says David Fetterolf, president of lan-
goal of creating the best customer experience. guage services at Stratus Video, a telehealth and
Our product development, marketing, sales language services company. “I like to encour-
and customer success teams work in lock- age entrepreneurial spirit. If someone on our
step to deliver a seamless experience, from team has a different or innovative way to tackle
the buyer’s first impression until long past the a problem, I encourage them to come forward.
point of sale.” That goes for every level of the organization.”
A majority of all survey respondents, 62%, specific quality initiative. It becomes baked
also indicate that their quality efforts are con- into the way employees approach their jobs
sidered to be formal initiatives that have been and output.”
put in place within their organizations. This
means they have the support of upper man- The variety of forms quality efforts take is
agement, and it confirms the survey findings more widely seen within the established
of senior executive awareness and commit- quality organizations participating in the
ment to quality objectives. survey. For instance, employee collabora-
tion is encouraged at close to three-fourths
“We have a quality management program as of these enterprises, versus 67% of develop-
well as training for each team that explains ing organizations and 57% of lagging. Risk
their part in delivering predictable quality to management is also more likely a part of
our customers,” says Tim Lang, senior execu- established quality organizations, as are data
tive vice president and CTO of MicroStrategy, quality and efforts to deliver superior end-to-
an analytics software company. “We knew we end customer experiences. Wide gaps between
needed to reinforce the message that qual- established and lagging organizations are seen
ity is critical to our company’s success. It’s in terms of emphasis on services delivery as
important to have quality-centric programs part of quality initiatives, as well as engage-
to enforce best practices and provide strategic ment with customers and partners to boost
direction for everyone in the company, from innovation.
the CEO down.”
While quality is often seen as the brainchild
Malloy says his organization does not have of advocates within organizations who seek
a formal quality management program, to reduce waste and repeated processes, much
“but delivering quality is something that of the impetus is actually coming from forces
we encourage our employees to think about on the outside—especially today’s custom-
each and every day. We want them to ask ers. The most prominent driver for all survey
themselves, ‘What can I do today to create respondents’ performance excellence initia-
a meaningful experience for our customers? tives is customer demand for quality, cited by
How do I ensure that, regardless of my role, two-thirds. A little over 60% are looking to
my work connects our business and defines quality initiatives to increase customer value,
the nature of our partnership with our cus- as well as to boost the overall customer expe-
tomers?’ When you make quality a key rience. Maintaining brand reputation is also
element of your success and the success of a key consideration when launching a quality
your customer, there isn’t really a need for a initiative (Fig. C-2).
Figure C-2 Top 10 Enterprise Quality Drivers
(Percentage rating impact "6" and "7" on a scale of 1-7, with 7 meaning "significant driver")
Siloed/
Struggling
Brand reputation reliability 63% 73% 62% 49%
Customer demand for quality 67% 71% 69% 57%
Customer value 64% 69% 66% 52%
Improving overall
customer experience
63% 70% 64% 52%
Brand value 60% 66% 60% 51%
Profitability 57% 63% 56% 52%
Enabling compliance 56% 64% 55% 44%
Improving operational efficiency 56% 61% 57% 48%
Competitive differentiation 55% 65% 53% 44%
Reducing costs 52% 55% 50% 51%
Quality “starts and ends with the customer,” established quality organizations—73% cite
says Matt Girvan, the cofounder and presi- this as their key driver, versus 49% of all
dent of My Gung Ho LLC, a mobile app respondents with lagging organizations. For
development company. “To be able to meet lagging organizations, customer demands are
our customers’ needs, we have to first focus creating the need for more quality thinking.
internally to find signs of quality issues
before the customers see them, and then Just as important as the delivery of quality
also make it right if a customer actually across enterprises are the stated values that
experiences one of our misses.” Girvan, who underpin and justify these efforts. All sur-
has worked with companies such as Jaguar, vey respondents were asked to describe their
Nissan and Danaher, says that internal corporate quality values, defined as values
operational quality and external customer related to the promotion and implementa-
quality should always be seen as one and the tion of quality, continuous improvement,
same. “Proactively, you’re trying to catch performance excellence and any related
internal mistakes; and with the same gusto, activities. More than three-fourths say the
you’re trying to fix things afterward that main value sought from their programs is to
couldn’t have been anticipated. Good com- continuously improve and deliver, followed
panies work on both ends of the spectrum by the ability to meet or surpass customer
with the same focus: the customer.” expectations. The active solicitation and
embrace of customer feedback is also a
Interestingly, the need to enhance a cor- leading component of corporate quality ini-
porate brand is the main driving force for tiatives (Fig. C-3).
Figure C-3 Top 10 Enterprise Quality Values
Siloed/
Struggling
Continuously improve/
continuously deliver
77% 84% 79% 64%
Meet or surpass
customer expectations
69% 76% 70% 57%
Encourage and value
customer feedback
67% 78% 65% 53%
Deliver superior user or
customer experience
65% 74% 66% 52%
Encourage and respect employee
feedback
63% 72% 65% 49%
Provide active quality leadership 61% 74% 60% 46%
Base decisions on data 60% 69% 58% 50%
Enhance sustainability 55% 68% 52% 42%
Reward employee feedback 51% 65% 49% 36%
Fail fast and learn 48% 55% 47% 39%
For some companies, products don’t get engagements to be strategic, 84%, assign this
shipped without customer sign-off. Such is as their most prominent value. Respondents
the case with Sapho, which provides a soft- at developing organizations follow at 79%,
ware integration platform. “Software quality while 64% of those at lagging organiza-
has gotten really sloppy these days because tions see this as their overarching value.
SaaS is easy to patch in real time,” says Peter Encouraging customer feedback is also a criti-
Yared, founder and chief technology officer of cal value for close to four-fifths of established
Sapho, and former CIO of CBS Interactive. organizations, but only 53% of lagging orga-
To meet this challenge, his company has nizations enshrine this value.
fully replicated several of its customers’ infra-
structures, and it runs tests against those “Quality is about getting the best people,
environments. “One of our core tenets is training them and trusting them to make
craftsmanship,” he adds. “Quality is not just decisions for their own departments,” says
‘something works.’ It must also meet the Fetterolf. “I have always believed in the
needs of what people want from it, and also power of ongoing training and investing in
have an artistic quality.” our team. For me, a quality organization is
all about setting up a culture that encourages
For established quality organizations, the personal growth, and putting the right pro-
credo is continuous delivery and continuous cesses in place so that my team members can
improvement. The vast majority of all sur- achieve their goals.”
vey respondents who consider their quality
Quality Success as Seen by Senior Executives vs. Quality Professionals
Senior executives see quality as an effort that needs to reach across enterprise silos and boundaries.
They see continuous improvement closely aligned with innovation, shared development and infor-
mation systems performance. Hiring and human capital management are also closely intertwined
with quality as senior executives envision it. In contrast, quality professionals are more focused on
the management of specific programs and implementation of tools (Fig. C-4).
Figure C-4 Top 10 Characteristics of Enterprise Quality Efforts – By Job Roles
Quality
Senior Executives
Professionals
End-to-end customer experience 79% 33%
Risk management program 76% 55%
Encouragement of employee
input and collaboration
75% 58%
Quality policies originated and
managed by departments or 75% 51%
business units
Hiring policies and practices
reflecting quality commitment
75% 24%
Services delivery excellence 74% 36%
Business process re-engineering
or redesign efforts
71% 38%
Shared development/innovation
with partners, suppliers
71% 29%
Shared development/innovation
with customers
71% 30%
Results measured through data
analytics
70% 57%
HARNESSING THE POWER
OF QUALITY DATA
Data is flowing in from all corners of today’s enterprises, providing
executives and quality professionals unprecedented opportunities to track
and measure the progress of their efforts. Not only is transaction data
available to decision makers, but there is also an increasing amount of data
on customer website visits, purchasing preferences, product adoption,
product performance, employee interactions and all other important
processes. This is a resource that enables enterprises to tie the adoption
of continuous improvement efforts to results in the market, as well as to
identify issues that need to be addressed.
A majority of all respondents, 75%, measure the impact of their quality programs to some degree.
However, only one in four say this measurement is extensive. Established quality organizations
are well along with formal measurement of quality, but only 37% of all respondents in this group
report extensive measurement is now conducted (Fig. D-1).
Data may be in abundance across organizations, but for most decision makers, there is not enough
of the right data. Less than one-third of all survey respondents say most of the data they need to
track progress or make decisions is currently available. Even among established quality organi-
zations, less than half report they have most of the data they require. For siloed or struggling
organizations, the situation is even more dire—only 18% have access to the data they require to
effectively measure the progress of their quality efforts (Fig. D-2).
Figure D-1 Formally Measure Impact of Quality?
Figure D-2 All External and Internal Data for Driving and
Measuring Quality Initiatives Available Today?
“We generally don’t try to tie quality directly to sales dollars—in my experience, this often
leads to team members innocently creating return on invested capital studies for potential qual-
ity improvements,” says Girvan. “This tradeoff thinking often has the reverse effect than was
intended. Good quality drives better business, period.”
An important element of continuous improvement efforts is the ability to openly share and dis-
cuss data on the progress of these efforts. Overall, three in four also report and share at least
some of their quality information with other constituents or stakeholders across their organiza-
tions (Fig. D-3). Quality data is most extensively shared within organizations that are considered
established in their quality initiatives, demonstrating the importance of enabling enterprise stake-
holders to see and track their progress. Thirty-eight percent of these leading organizations report
their data is shared extensively. By contrast, there is very limited sharing of data within lagging
organizations—only 12% are able to extensively share such information.
Figure D-3 Provide Information Reporting and Sharing on Quality Impact?
When most indicate this information is shared with their top-level executives, a majority, 51%,
say it is also shared with just about all of their employees (Fig. D-4). “The standard belief is that
companies have a responsibility to their investors first, then their customers, then their employees.
I challenge leaders to invert that model,” says Stratus Video’s Fetterolf. “I find that when I focus
on the quality and management of our team, that they bring a higher level of customer service to
our clients, who then do more business with us that benefits our investors.”
For organizations within the established quality category, the sharing of performance excellence
data across all levels of their organizations is a key element to the success of their programs. Close
to six in 10 even share data with all or most of their workforces. By contrast, only 41% of lagging
organizations enable sharing across their employee bases.
Figure D-4 With Whom Is Quality Data Shared?
Siloed/
Struggling
Executive management 78% 78% 79% 77%
Quality teams/managers 71% 74% 70% 69%
Employees directly affected
62% 63% 64% 58%
or involved
All/most employees 51% 58% 49% 41%
Shareholders/investors 28% 32% 27% 20%
General public/press release 11% 11% 11% 11%
“Just like a doctor diagnoses symptoms, you must regularly conduct a health check across your
organization and identify and remove the hurdles to delivering quality,” says MicroStrategy’s
Lang. “It takes courage and direction to deliver these changes, as hurdles are often across depart-
ments and throughout multiple levels of leadership. You can expect all forms of these obstacles
to change, so it’s critical to ground all of your improvements with empirical data and metrics. At
MicroStrategy, we use our own product to manage quality. We connect our product directly to
our systems of record and broadcast enterprise quality dashboards. Transparency is one of our
core values, and when quality is your focus, using the same data to tell the same quality improve-
ment story across the enterprise is incredibly powerful.”
Key performance indicators (KPIs) are also an essential part of measuring the outcomes of con-
tinuous improvement efforts. A majority, 56%, report their KPIs are configured to track the
performance of workgroups. Another 52% say they have linked their quality KPIs to their overall
business vision, and half are comparing KPIs with overall organization performance (Fig. D-5).
Established quality organizations are almost twice as likely to be linking quality KPIs to their
overall business visions as struggling organizations (62% versus 37%), an indicator of the stra-
tegic value quality has in leading enterprises. There is also greater linkage between quality KPIs
and group performance in established organizations, as well as sharing of KPI data, mirroring the
overall sharing of data discussed above.
Ways in Which Key Performance Indicators
Figure D-5
(KPIs) Are Linked to Quality
Siloed/
Struggling
KPIs track the
performance of groups
56% 60% 59% 46%
KPIs can be tracked to the
business vision
52% 62% 51% 37%
Performance vs. KPIs is
transparent/shared
50% 58% 51% 36%
KPIs track the performance
of individuals
45% 53% 44% 34%
Appropriate incentives reinforce
and drive performance against KPIs
43% 52% 43% 31%
KPIs promote cooperation among
business units
43% 52% 43% 30%
All staff—from “line” to CEO—
understand how their performance 43% 56% 40% 30%
fits in
KPIs are benchmarked against the
best, highest-performing organiza- 37% 47% 36% 24%
tions in the industry
We have no formal KPIs associated
with quality programs at this time
11% 2% 8% 27%
The most often-leveraged metrics employed include customer satisfaction/complaints (71%),

meeting compliance standards/audits (59%), product returns/complaints (57%), customer experi-
ence (55%), and overall sales or revenue (53%) (Fig. D-6).
Figure D-6 Top 10 Broad-Based Metrics by Which Quality Is Measured
Siloed/
Struggling
Customer satisfaction/
complaints 71% 74% 73% 63%
Meeting compliance
standards/audits 59% 64% 57% 54%
Product returns/
complaints 57% 59% 57% 54%
Customer experience 55% 64% 52% 46%
Overall sales or revenue 53% 56% 54% 46%
Customer retention/
churn 49% 57% 49% 38%
Employee output/ 49% 56% 48% 39%
productivity
Employee satisfaction 46% 54% 46% 34%
Supplier/partner 45% 53% 44% 34%
complaints
Employee retention/ 43% 50% 43% 32%
turnover
MicroStrategy implemented what the company calls a Universal Benchmark initiative, Lang
explains. “We needed to cultivate an understanding of every process as it relates to our competi-
tors and industry leaders. The Universal Benchmark is a methodical measurement of each product
process that will tell us where we need to invest, where we need to improve and where we’re set-
ting best-in-class standards. Initially, these insights will be used by our product management,
engineering and customer service teams—which will help them better prepare product and devel-
opment plans, and provide insight into how best to support our customer base. The vision is to
eventually provide insight to our finance, human resources, marketing and sales teams too, giving
a holistic view into the people, product and processes.”
It’s important to frame quality efforts in terms of solid goals, says Nautilus’ McMahon. “You have
to have measures you agree to before you start a program. How are we going to know when we’ve
reached a success point?” he asks. “From there we move the goal posts further, to try to improve
more. It isn’t just around the metrics, it’s around the core concept of trying to do right by the cus-
tomer,” he adds.
For organizations, achieving customer satisfaction and lowering, or eliminating, complaints is the
most important metric by which to gauge their continuous improvement efforts. Senior executives
in developing and lagging organizations also see this metric as key to their nascent efforts.
“Key customers, the patient and family for healthcare, must be at the center of all quality efforts,”
says Northwell’s Jarrett. “Our quality strategy is based on three principles that serve as priorities
across multiple years—so they don’t become the flavor of the month. They are: lowest preventable
mortality; safest healthcare (zero healthcare-acquired conditions); and best value (utilizing
evidence-based practice). All quality and safety efforts need to fit into improving one of these
three categories.”
Quality and Data as Seen by Senior Executives vs. Quality Professionals
Senior executives see more extensive reporting and sharing of quality information taking place
than quality professionals. Both groups agree there is extensive sharing of continuous improve-
ment data among their own groups, and majorities say that data is also provided to employees
directly impacted by quality initiatives. However, senior executives see quality information going
beyond groups directly engaged in their programs, with data distributed across the entirety of
their workforces, as well as with shareholders or investors (Fig. D-7).
Figure D-7 With Whom Is Quality Data Shared? – By Job Roles
QUALITY IN THE DIGITAL ERA
In recent years, nothing has been shaking the ground beneath enterprises
more than the rise of digital organizations. Enterprises built on cloud
computing services and mobile apps are disrupting entire markets with
new business models, such as ride sharing, home sharing and online food
delivery. In many cases, these disruptors have few employees and few
assets, as they act as brokers of information, linking buyers with products
and services produced elsewhere. Even within a relatively staid industry
such as insurance, a new breed of tech- and data-driven “InsurTech”
companies are gaining ground with more innovative ways to deliver
services. Large, established corporations are moving in this direction as
well, looking to digitize processes and adopt business models that offer
digital channels of engagement.
The question is, what impact will this move- services and information quality, and more
ment have on quality, which traditionally attention required for online user or customer
has been focused on physical goods pro- experiences (Fig. E-2).
duction and service delivery? Do digitized
processes—perhaps enhanced by artificial Organizations within the established category
intelligence—require the same attention and are embracing digital transformation as key to
rigor as physical production processes to their quality efforts, while also acknowledging
ensure quality? that it is changing major components of those
efforts. A majority of all respondents in leading
A majority of enterprises, 70%, report that organizations, for example, agree that digital
digital processes and the movement to digi- engagements produce data that is more action-
tal enterprises have been transforming their able than traditional, more manual processes
continuous improvement initiatives to some have traditionally delivered. This creates dif-
extent (Fig. E-1). A majority, 52%, state that ferent sets of performance expectations, versus
digital processes are requiring faster responses about one-third of lagging organizations aware
to issues or changes in product or ser- of such changes. At the same time, a large
vice delivery. There is also a broad range of share of all respondents (42%) within estab-
other adaptations indicated by close to half lished organizations state that digital is still a
of all respondents, including the availabil- relatively new phenomenon, and performance
ity of more actionable data, a greater focus on expectations have yet to be set.
Figure E-1
Rise of Digital Processes and Digital
Enterprise Change Approach to Quality?
Figure E-2
How Digital Processes/Digital Enterprises
Change Quality Approaches
Siloed/
Struggling
The speed of digital
accelerates required
responses to issues/ 52% 58% 50% 45%
changes
Digital engagements
provide more data that is 48% 58% 45% 40%
actionable
Digital drives greater
focus on services and 48% 56% 47% 40%
information quality
Increases emphasis on
online user or customer 48% 55% 47% 38%
experience
Performance expecta-
tions are different than 47% 54% 47% 36%
for traditional processes
Performance expecta-
tions for digital have not 39% 42% 40% 34%
yet been established
Quality expectations for
digital have not yet been 39% 41% 40% 34%
established
Digital leaves an easier trail to follow for analysis. A majority, 62%, agree that the advent of digi-
tal has made it easier to share and distribute information on continuous improvement progress or
challenges. By a wide margin, respondents with established quality organizations agree that dig-
ital has made their jobs easier—69% state it has made it easier to report and share data, versus
51% of their lagging counterparts (Fig. E-3).
Figure E-3 Quality Data Impact on Progress Reporting
Siloed/
Struggling
Much easier to report/ 25% 32% 23% 19%
share
Somewhat easier 37% 37% 40% 33%
No difference 15% 15% 15% 16%
Somewhat more difficult 9% 10% 9% 9%
Much more difficult 2% 1% 1% 3%
Don't know/unsure 11% 5% 11% 20%
“In modern times, customer responses are recorded in real time no matter where they happen
in the world,” says Bryant University’s Gravier. “The shorter and more direct the producer-
market connection, the more the producer and customer will naturally act on that exchange
of information.”
There are additional benefits to digitization beyond data and faster delivery of services. “Digital
channels make everything easier,” says Fetterolf. “I can now hire the best talent from anywhere
in the world. Immediacy and connection quality have allowed me to build a remote team, some-
thing that has been crucial for our growth.”
Digital Quality as Seen by Senior Executives vs. Quality Professionals
While senior executives and quality professionals agree that digital technologies are reshaping the
implementation and delivery of continuous improvement within their enterprises, executives are
more cognizant of the impending changes that are part of this upcoming transformation. Most
business leaders see digital changing the equation for quality delivery within customer engage-
ments, the creation of valuable data as part of feedback loops, and the potential acceleration of
product and service delivery. In most cases, less than one-third of quality professionals are prepar-
ing for these shifts. Close to one-third even admit they are not aware of the implications of the
digital shift (Fig. E-4).
Figure E-4 How Digital Processes/Digital Enterprises
Change Quality Approaches – By Job Roles
ACTION ITEMS
This survey of top-tier executives and quality professionals shows
strong commitment at all organizational levels to raising the quality
bar. Companies are challenged to get their workforces on board with
awareness and skills, as well as overcoming outdated, rigid or slow
processes. However, professionals immersed in quality management are
neither prepared for the digital wave that is sweeping through enterprises
nor the repercussions digitized processes and product or service delivery
will have on continuous improvement initiatives. Digital means value must
be pushed out to customers faster than ever before.
The following are recommendations for managing and succeeding with

quality in the months and years ahead.
Incorporate performance excellence into business cases. Promoting investment into

quality initiatives may pay dividends many times over. However, the business needs
to clearly see the potential, or proofs of concept. All survey respondents see a direct
connection between the success of their quality initiatives and the success of the
entire organization. A majority agree their continuous improvement efforts have re-
sulted in increased profitability and have enhanced various key functions across their
organizations, especially in customer service, operations and production.
Remember that corporate culture matters. While there are many robust tools and
methodologies for boosting and measuring performance excellence, it ultimately
takes motivated people to deliver quality success. “Measurements are one thing,
but ultimately those are measurements of effort and effectiveness,” says McMahon.
“It’s people who deliver that. Everybody needs to take a piece of quality and own it.
And it’s much easier to rally people around a goal, such as ‘let’s make the best prod-
ucts we can; let’s do it the most efficient way we can so we can grow and be profit-
able.’ That’s an easier cry than: ‘Hey, our Pareto chart shows the following 10 things
are wrong; what are we going to do?’”
Ultimately, it’s about the customer. Continuous improvement may have a positive
impact on internal operations, but in today’s competitive economy, it’s important
that all efforts are directed to improving the customer experience. “Quality has al-
ways been externally focused on customers, but the means to achieve quality
has shifted over time from focusing internally on operations to focusing on the cus-
tomer,” says Gravier. “This shift is primarily driven by three factors. As competition
increases, customers use their enhanced bargaining power to demand either more
price concessions or more features per dollar. As production technology matures,
there’s a tendency for both economies of scope and scale to improve, which empow-
ers producers to generate more income by more closely matching products to the
needs of smaller market segments. As distribution channels mature, human social
connections play a powerful yet all too often underappreciated role.”
Measure everything. The saying "You can't manage what you can't measure" holds
true for quality initiatives. "In the digital age, we now have access to far more data
to inform our decisions," says Girvan. "It takes a broad approach, which looks deeply
at specifics, like the number of steps a user has to go through to achieve what
they want."
Run an open, no-fault environment. The survey identified the ability to collaborate as
critical to quality delivery. Employees need to feel they can work across organizational
boundaries to solve problems and deliver improvement, and communicate openly
when they see issues or wish to suggest new ways of working.
Prepare for digital disruption to conventional quality wisdom. The potential impact
of digitization on corporate processes and products is still relatively unknown. But
what is clear is that quality thinking must evolve along with it. For instance, the rise
of digital products, which can be shipped to customers in almost an instant, requires
more automated and systematic approaches to ensure such products are of the high-
est quality.
In today’s fast-moving, increasingly digitizing economy, continuous

improvement must pervade all activities across organizations. By following
these steps, organizations will be assured of the growth and enhanced
profitability quality will deliver.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Forbes Insights and ASQ would like to thank the following individuals,
interviewed for this report, for their time and expertise.
• David Fetterolf, President, Stratus Video

• Matt Girvan, Cofounder and President, My Gung Ho LLC
• Michael Gravier, Associate Professor of Marketing and Global Supply Chain
Management, Bryant University
• Dr. Mark Jarrett, Chief Quality Officer, Northwell Health

• Tim Lang, CTO and Senior Executive VP, MicroStrategy
• Craig Malloy, CEO, Lifesize
• Bill McMahon, Chief Operating Officer, Nautilus, Inc.
• Peter Yared, Former CIO, CBS Interactive; Current Founder and CTO, Sapho
Forbes Insights and ASQ also extend their gratitude to our panel of
advisors who have helped shape this research.
• Elmer Corbin, Director, Delivery Excellence, IBM

• Mats Deleryd, CEO and President, Swedish Institute for Quality
• Glen Griffiths, Executive Vice President, Quality and Reliability, Bloom Energy
• C.V. Raman, Executive Director, Engineering, Maruti Suzuki
• Gideon Roth, VP, Quality and Regulatory, Cabiran (1991) Ltd.
• Paulo Sampaio, Professor of Quality Engineering and Management,
University of Minho
• Willy Vandenbrande, President, QS Consult

• Gregory H. Watson, Chairman, Business Excellence Solutions, Ltd.
COPYRIGHT © 2017 FORBES INSIGHTS | 43
ABOUT
FORBES INSIGHTS
Forbes Insights is the strategic research and thought leadership practice of Forbes Media, a global
media, branding and technology company whose combined platforms reach nearly 75 million
business decision makers worldwide on a monthly basis. By leveraging proprietary databases of
senior-level executives in the Forbes community, Forbes Insights conducts research on a wide
range of topics to position brands as thought leaders and drive stakeholder engagement. Research
findings are delivered through a variety of digital, print and live executions, and amplified across
Forbes’ social and media platforms.
FORBES INSIGHTS SALES
Bruce Rogers, Chief Insights Officer North America

Erika Maguire, Director of Programs Brian McLeod, Executive Director
Andrea Nishi, Project Manager [email protected]
Matthew Muszala, Manager
William Thompson, Manager
EDITORIAL
EMEA
Kasia Wandycz Moreno, Director
Tibor Fuchsel, Manager
Hugo S. Moreno, Director
Joe McKendrick, Report Author APAC
Kara Grant, Designer Serene Lee, Executive Director
RESEARCH
Ross Gagnon, Director

Kimberly Kurata, Senior Analyst
Sara Chin, Research Analyst
499 Washington Blvd., Jersey City, NJ 07310 | 212.366.8890 | www.forbes.com/forbesinsights

Rising Economic Power of Quality

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rising Economic Power of Quality

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rising Economic Power of Quality

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE RISING ECONOMIC

5. QUALITY DRIVES GROWTH ......................................................................................................11

6. QUALITY CHALLENGES ...............................................................................................................16

7. MAKING QUALITY SUCCEED ....................................................................................................23

8. HARNESSING THE POWER OF QUALITY DATA......................................................................29

9. QUALITY IN THE DIGITAL ERA....................................................................................................36

10. ACTION ITEMS .........................................................................................................................40

These advancing organizations understand that—because of customer demand—responsive-

For the purposes of this survey, we defined quality initiatives as

36% Established: Throughout this report, we examine the

39 % Developing: ceed, quality initiatives need to be woven

While these three categories will be used through-

What is your title?

Which of the following best describes your industry?

Where is your organization headquartered?

A spirit of collaboration and open communication is more essential to quality suc-

Survey respondents who rated their orga-

Quality management now extends across the

Figure A-5 Top 10 Business Areas Touched by Quality Initiatives

Quality Growth as Seen by Senior Executives vs. Quality Professionals

Note: May not add to 100% due to rounding

Note: May not add to 100% due to rounding

Amount of Line Employee or Staff Time Spent Addressing

Note: May not add to 100% due to rounding

Quality Challenges as Seen by Senior Executives

Figure C-4 Top 10 Characteristics of Enterprise Quality Efforts – By Job Roles

Note: May not add to 100% due to rounding

Note: May not add to 100% due to rounding

Figure D-3 Provide Information Reporting and Sharing on Quality Impact?

Note: May not add to 100% due to rounding

The most often-leveraged metrics employed include customer satisfaction/complaints (71%),

Quality and Data as Seen by Senior Executives vs. Quality Professionals

Figure D-7 With Whom Is Quality Data Shared? – By Job Roles

Note: May not add to 100% due to rounding

Figure E-3 Quality Data Impact on Progress Reporting

Digital Quality as Seen by Senior Executives vs. Quality Professionals

The following are recommendations for managing and succeeding with

Incorporate performance excellence into business cases. Promoting investment into

In today’s fast-moving, increasingly digitizing economy, continuous

• David Fetterolf, President, Stratus Video

• Dr. Mark Jarrett, Chief Quality Officer, Northwell Health

• Elmer Corbin, Director, Delivery Excellence, IBM

• Willy Vandenbrande, President, QS Consult

FORBES INSIGHTS SALES

Bruce Rogers, Chief Insights Officer North America

Ross Gagnon, Director

499 Washington Blvd., Jersey City, NJ 07310 | 212.366.8890 | www.forbes.com/forbesinsights

You might also like