By Wilson Fernandez
In today’s business environment, we have made significant strides in integrating Quality Assurance (QA) into the core processes of organisations. Yet, despite these advancements, many businesses continue to employ personnel dedicated to Quality Control (QC). While it may seem like an effective short-term strategy, relying on QC for process monitoring can be a waste of valuable time and energy. As someone who has spent over three decades in the field, I firmly believe that businesses must rethink their approach and prioritise Quality Assurance over Quality Control.
The Difference Between QA and QC
Before we delve into the reasons for this shift, it’s important to clarify the distinction between QA and QC.
- Quality Control (QC) is reactive in nature. It involves inspecting products or processes after they have been produced to ensure they meet the desired quality standards. While QC is an essential part of the process in certain industries, particularly in research and development environments or laboratory settings, it does not actively prevent quality issues from arising.
- Quality Assurance (QA), on the other hand, is proactive. It focuses on preventing defects by ensuring that processes are well-designed, controlled, and improved over time. QA builds robust systems to guarantee quality at every stage, from design to delivery, rather than simply identifying problems after the fact.
The key difference is that while QC reacts to issues, QA ensures those issues never arise in the first place.
Note: The definition of QA (3.3.6) and QC (3.3.7) per ISO 9000:2015 Quality management systems —
Fundamentals and vocabulary are as below
- Quality Assurance (QA) – part of quality management focused on providing confidence that quality requirements will be fulfilled
- Quality Control (QC) – part of quality management focused on fulfilling quality requirements
The Role of Risk Management in Quality Assurance
An effective management system within any organisation must incorporate Risk Management as a key element. Risk management is about identifying potential threats—technical, commercial, or operational—and putting measures in place to mitigate them. A well-deployed QA system provides organisations, teams, and stakeholders with the assurance that proper measures are taken to avoid such risks.
QA also ensures that the risk management process is effective, identifying potential hazards, pitfalls, and failure points. This allows the Risk Management team to develop more precise and effective measures to address issues before they become significant. In some instances, this may require investment in error-proofing methods and techniques to ensure consistent, quality products and services. Although such solutions may have commercial impacts in the short term, they guarantee long-term stability, compliance with regulatory requirements, and customer satisfaction.
Why Businesses Should Invest in Quality Assurance
1. Cost Efficiency in the Long Run
While employing QC personnel may seem like a quick fix, it often leads to escalating costs in the long term. By waiting for issues to arise and then addressing them, organisations incur costs related to rework, waste, and sometimes even damage to brand reputation. QA, on the other hand, is designed to address potential issues before they happen, saving businesses from the costs associated with corrective actions and customer dissatisfaction.
2. Proactive Problem-Solving
QA is inherently proactive. It allows businesses to identify weak points in their processes before they translate into real-world problems. By incorporating quality assurance into your operations, you’re ensuring that your systems are continually improving, evolving, and adapting to meet the needs of your business, customers, and stakeholders. This long-term investment in process improvement will consistently yield better results than the short-term fix that QC provides.
3. Better Use of Resources
When businesses rely on QC to ensure quality, they are often burning through resources by constantly checking, testing, and rechecking products or processes. This not only diverts attention from the core business activities but also consumes time and effort in tasks that could have been avoided with a robust QA system. QA, by embedding quality practices from the beginning, ensures that fewer resources are needed for rectifying errors, enabling a more efficient and productive workforce.
4. Alignment with Business Strategy
A strategic approach to quality must align with business goals. QA does just that. It integrates with the overall objectives of the business, creating systems and processes that support sustainable growth. QC, in contrast, often operates as an isolated function, looking solely at product output rather than the underlying processes that drive business success.
5. Stronger Brand Reputation and Customer Satisfaction
The ultimate goal of any quality system is to enhance customer satisfaction. QA, by ensuring that high standards are consistently met, builds customer trust over time. A business that proactively delivers quality is more likely to develop a loyal customer base. QC, however, tends to focus more on post-production fixes, which can lead to delayed delivery times and a more reactive approach to customer concerns.
6. Reduced Pressure and Burnout
The reactive nature of QC puts constant pressure on the organisation, including the entire supply chain. This can lead to burnout for employees, lower morale, and a less positive working environment. In contrast, QA provides a stable foundation by ensuring that processes are designed to meet quality standards in advance, creating a more enjoyable and productive work atmosphere. Employees at all levels can take pride in knowing they are contributing to the long-term success and stability of the organisation, reducing stress and promoting a healthy work culture.
Short-Term vs. Long-Term Success
In the short term, a business may find that employing QC professionals offers some comfort. It may seem easier to inspect and test the final product to ensure it meets standards. However, this approach is fundamentally flawed in the long term. The reliance on QC creates a cycle of constant firefighting where businesses are always addressing issues rather than eliminating them. This continual state of reaction is neither technically nor commercially viable in today’s competitive market.
It is also evident that those business owners and organisations that are focused on short-term gains and lack support for quality assurance tend to rely on band-aid fixes through the QC approach. This creates a working culture where quick fixes are preferred over long-term solutions, negatively impacting the quality, safety, and security of the products and services provided. This approach has a lasting effect on both the internal working environment and the organisation’s brand and image. The culture of cutting corners in favour of immediate results can cause significant damage to the company’s reputation, ultimately leading to longer-term consequences for both its workforce and its customers.
Investing in Quality Assurance, on the other hand, ensures that businesses stay ahead of the curve. By proactively addressing quality at every level of its operation, businesses can deliver superior products and services, enhance their reputation, and ultimately achieve long-term success.
The Role of QC in the Quality Management System (QMS)
QC should be seen as a small, but necessary, function within the larger framework of Quality Management Systems (QMS). However, the approach should always be QA-focused, using and applying QC appropriately when needed. QC inspections should not be the main driver of product quality but should be integrated into a broader QA strategy that focuses on preventing defects through robust systems and continuous improvement.
Moreover, the objective and lessons learned from QC failures must feed back into the QA process. Any issues identified during QC inspections should trigger reviews and updates to processes, procedures, and systems. This reflection and adaptation are vital for ensuring that mistakes are not repeated, and that the organisation continuously improves its approach to quality management.
The Bottom Line
The message is clear: businesses that continue to invest in Quality Control over Quality Assurance are setting themselves up for a constant struggle to maintain standards. QA is not just an added luxury—it’s an essential part of a well-functioning, forward-thinking organisation. Quality Assurance is not only the better investment for the long-term health of your business but also a way to demonstrate a commitment to excellence. In my experience, shifting the focus from QC to QA is the right decision for any business aiming to grow sustainably and effectively.
In conclusion, it’s time for businesses to recognise the difference between QA and QC and embrace the benefits of proactive, preventative quality management. The era of chasing tail-end problems must end, and the future of business success lies in anticipating, mitigating, and solving issues before they even arise. The long-term benefits of QA, from risk management to customer satisfaction and workplace well-being, far outweigh the short-term convenience of QC.