Download App
Better Online and Trade Show Sourcing Experiences.Scan the QR code to download.
Learn More
Hot Topics
Just for You
Does it necessarily cost more to reduce the number of defects? That’s a good question in the sense that it brings up different responses from different people.
I am going to expose a few very different mindsets about the whole “quality” concept.
If you ask 99% of Chinese manufacturers, they will say “of course, it will cost more to reduce the proportion of defects”.
They think there are only two ways of increasing the quality standard:
Importers use statistical quality control standards based on AQL limits. If a buyer sets the tolerance below what is usually considered “normal” for general consumer goods, the supplier generally raises prices.
What is wrong with this mindset? It is 100% reactive, 0% proactive. There is no initiative to improve design & production processes.
It is a very “old school” approach.
A high defect rate is actually quite expensive. It is at the root of the “costs of poor quality“.
Here are a few examples of such costs:
Juran, one of the great quality thinkers, summed it up nicely with the graph below.

I like Juran’s cost of quality graph. And it is important to note that the point where the two curbs intersect (when cost of quality = cost of poor quality) is not in a fixed position. It can move to the right, and allow for low-cost AND high-quality production.
So, how to move it to the right? Here are a few ideas:
All these actions improve quality without increasing the average unit cost.
When will most Chinese manufacturers understand this? When will they make the link between a better production organization and better financial results?
Renaud Anjoran is the founder of Sofeast Quality Control and helps importers to improve and secure their product quality in China. He writes advice for importers on the Quality Inspection blog. He lives full time in Shenzhen, China. You can contact him at info@sofeast.com.
More Sourcing News
Read Also