The costs of maintaining quality
- Inspection and testing costs: inspectors have to be paid, testing equipment has to be bought and maintained, and output waits to be checked instead of being sold.
- Staff training: employees have to be taught the standard and how to check their own work against it, which costs the trainer's time and the output lost while they are away from the job.
- Training is a repeated cost rather than a one-off, because every new starter needs it and staff turnover in shops and restaurants is high.
- Better materials and better suppliers: higher-grade inputs and dependable suppliers charge more per unit, so the cost of making each item rises before anything has been sold.
- Slower production: checking at each stage means fewer units leave the factory each hour, so rent and machinery are spread over less output and the cost of each unit rises.
- Product recalls and compensation: when quality fails anyway, the business must trace and contact buyers, replace or repair goods already sold, and may have to compensate customers or a retailer for sales lost while the product is off the shelves.
Example
- A food producer that finds an allergen missing from its label has to withdraw every pack from Tesco and Asda shelves at its own expense.
- The withdrawal costs far more than the extra checks on packaging would have done, which is why many firms treat quality spending as protection against a much larger bill.
The benefits of maintaining quality
- Additional sales: a product that does what it promises sells more, because satisfied customers buy again and recommend it to people the business never advertised to.
- Repeat custom and loyalty: keeping an existing customer costs far less than advertising to find a new one, and steady repeat orders let the business plan production and staffing with confidence.
- Image and reputation: a name for reliability attracts buyers who have never tried the product, and large retailers prefer to stock brands their shoppers already trust.
- A higher price: buyers will pay more for something they expect to last, which is how Dyson sells vacuum cleaners at several hundred pounds against rivals under £50, so the money spent on engineering and testing returns as a wider margin.
- Less waste and rework: getting the work right first time means fewer items scrapped, reworked or refunded, so part of the spending on quality pays for itself in lower costs.
Common Mistake
- Maintaining quality does not mean going upmarket, so an Aldi own-label pizza needs the same spending on consistency as a premium brand does.
- A higher price is one possible benefit of maintaining quality rather than a definition of it, since a £900 phone sold with a fault is poor quality however expensive it is.
Quality in the provision of services
- A service is produced while the customer is present, so it cannot be inspected and put right before they experience it.
- The spending therefore goes on people rather than testing equipment: training, written procedures, supervision, and enough staff to give each customer proper attention.
- Consistency between staff and between branches is the hard part, because the same chain can feel excellent in one town and careless in the next.
- Putting a service failure right costs a refund or a free repeat, and the customer has already lived through the bad experience, which no refund erases.
Example
- Premier Inn spends heavily on identical room layouts, cleaning checklists and staff training so that a room in Leeds matches a room in Bristol.
- That predictability is what customers are paying for, so the training budget protects the whole brand rather than one hotel.
Quality problems as a business grows
- More sites and more staff: the owner can no longer watch every job, so standards drift unless they are written down, trained and checked by somebody else.
- Outsourcing: paying another business to make the product or handle part of the work puts quality in somebody else's hands, and their priority is their own costs.
- A supplier that quietly swaps to cheaper materials protects its own margin, while the complaints land on the brand whose name is on the box.
- Franchising: each franchisee runs their own outlet, so the brand depends on people the franchisor does not employ and cannot supervise day to day.
- This is why franchise agreements set out exactly which ingredients, suppliers and procedures must be used, backed up by regular inspection visits.
Note
How outsourcing and franchising work as methods of growth belongs to the business growth topic, so here you need only their effect on quality.
Weighing the costs against the benefits
- Nearly all of the cost is paid now while the extra sales and the reputation build over years, which is a real problem for a business that is short of cash today.
- The spending is repaid most clearly where a failure would be dangerous or highly public, such as food, medicines, cars or childcare, and where customers choose on trust rather than on price alone.
- Growth usually pushes the cost up, because work the owner once checked personally now has to be covered by written standards, supplier audits and inspection visits.
Exam technique
- The usual wording is evaluate whether the business should spend more on maintaining quality, which means you must actually decide, not set out both sides and stop.
- Base the decision on something in the case, such as how much cash the business has, what its customers are paying for, or whether it is about to franchise.
- The mistake students actually make is listing benefits only, as though quality were free, so always name what the business gives up to get it.
Self review
- Name four costs of maintaining quality.
- How does maintaining quality lead to additional sales?
- Why can maintaining quality let a business charge a higher price?
- Why is quality harder to control in a service than in a factory?
- Why do outsourcing and franchising put quality at risk?