Various definitions of the concept of quality have been put forward.
One generic definition (Pass, 2006b) is as follows:
The overall characteristics of a product or service that fulfill the requirements of customers in terms of quality.
This definition aligns with the viewpoint of Joseph Juran, who, in the 1950s, defined quality as ‘fitness for use’ (as quoted in ASQ, 2019).
This definition is largely consistent with the definition of quality provided by APM (2019, p. 214):
The suitability for the intended purpose and the degree to which the output of a process or the process itself conforms to the requirements.
Now take a moment to consider the following statements about quality. Which ones do you agree with?
- Quality should prioritize the customer’s needs.
- Quality is an internal focus.
- Quality should be considered from the project’s inception.
- The execution phase of a project is crucial for achieving quality goals.
- Quality issues should be openly discussed to identify corrective actions.
- Quality problems should be concealed from customers and possibly managers.
- Individuals are enthusiastic about producing high-quality outcomes.
- Team members do not produce quality outputs without close supervision.
Share your thoughts on these statements in the discussion section below.
I agree that quality should prioritize the customer’s needs because the customers are the end users, therefore their needs should be put into consideration. I also agree that quality should be considered from the beginning or inception of the project. I also agree that quality issues should be openly discussed to identify corrective actions through proper communication. I disagree that quality problems should be concealed from customers and possibly managers.
I agree that quality should prioritise the customer’s needs, after all, they are the end users of the project’s outcomes. I also agree that quality should be considered from the project’s inception, not just at the middle of the project. The project team members should be made aware of the quality requirements of the project so they can keep them in mind while working on the project. I also agree that the execution phase of a project is crucial for achieving quality goals because that is where the actual project work starts. I also agree that quality issues should be openly discussed to identify corrective actions. Quality issues should not be hidden but corrected, this is about transparency. I also agree that though not at all times, but in most cases, team members do not produce quality outputs without close supervision.
I believe quality should be embedded in every phase of a project—not treated as something that only matters during execution. If a project manager neglects quality early on, the organisation’s reputation can easily suffer. I also disagree with the idea that quality issues should be hidden from clients or senior managers. Likewise, the assumption that people are only motivated to deliver quality work under strict supervision is misleading. In reality, transparency, shared responsibility, and empowering the team lead to better-quality outcomes.
Jinga Benson
I agree that quality should always focus on the customer’s needs, as meeting expectations is the core of success. I also think quality must be considered from the very beginning of a project, not just during execution, because early planning prevents bigger problems later. Open discussion of quality issues is essential to find corrective actions, rather than hiding problems, which only makes things worse. While many people are keen to produce quality work, I’ve noticed that teams perform best when given clear guidance and ownership, rather than relying solely on close supervision. Overall, quality is a shared responsibility, and fostering a culture of openness and accountability makes it achievable
I agree that quality should be prioritize the customers’ needs. Because quality is fundamentally about meeting customer requirements. I also agree that quality should be considered from the project’s inception. The project must be planned from the beginning, not inspected at the end. I agree with almost all the quqlity expect for Quality problems should be concealed from customers and possibly managers. With proper systems, training, and ownership, teams can produce quality work without micromanagement., that means i disagrre with team members do not produce quality outputs without close supervision.
Thanks for sharing. I read many of your blog posts, cool, your blog is very good.
I strongly agree that quality should prioritize the customer’s needs. Whether you’re managing a project or organizing an event, the ultimate measure of success is how well it satisfies the people it’s meant for. If attendees or clients are not satisfied, then the project hasn’t truly delivered value.
I partially disagree with the idea that quality is only an internal focus. While internal standards, processes, and controls are important, quality must also be externally validated. It should balance both internal efficiency and external satisfaction.
I completely agree that quality should be considered from the project’s inception. Waiting until execution or delivery stages to think about quality often leads to costly mistakes. Planning for quality early helps set clear standards, allocate resources properly, and avoid rework.
The statement that the execution phase is crucial for achieving quality goals is also true. This is where plans are implemented, and without proper monitoring and control, even the best plans can fail.
I strongly agree that quality issues should be openly discussed. Transparency allows teams to learn, improve, and prevent recurrence. Hiding problems only compounds them and can damage trust.
On the other hand, I strongly disagree that quality problems should be concealed from customers or managers. This approach is risky and unethical. In event management, for example, hiding issues can lead to bigger failures during the event itself.
I believe that individuals are generally enthusiastic about producing high-quality outcomes, especially when they feel valued, clear about expectations, and properly supported.
However, I also think it is not entirely true that team members cannot produce quality without close supervision. While guidance and accountability are necessary, micromanagement can reduce creativity and ownership. A well-trained and motivated team can deliver quality with the right structure and trust.
I agree with most statements about quality.butbthe ones I think I don’t fully agree with os that ‘people are keen on producing quality output’.i would argue not everyone is and some people just want to get the work done and over with.
Another statement is the one where team member do not produce quality outputs without close supervision.
My current team do produce quality,their excellent best if I just say
I agree with most of the statements made. Quality should also be considered from the perspective of a customer, I mean, they are the final users of the product or service. Therefore, the customer’s needs should be considered in terms of the quality of the product. It should also be stated from the start of the project, this should be part of the project plan. Also, quality issues should be addressed openly to improve the quality, when needed.