Why Quality Assurance Matters in the Requirements Management Phase

What Is Quality Assurance?

Quality Assurance (QA) is a systematic process aimed at ensuring that products or services meet certain standards of quality. It involves a set of activities and procedures designed to prevent defects or issues during the production or development process, rather than just identifying them after they occur.

Key Aspects of Quality Assurance

Preventive Focus: QA emphasizes preventing errors or defects through careful planning, documentation, and systematic processes.

Process-Oriented: QA is concerned with improving and managing the processes used to create products or deliver services. This includes defining clear procedures, standards, and guidelines.

Standards and Compliance: QA often involves ensuring that products or services comply with established industry standards, regulations, or customer requirements.

Continuous Improvement: QA seeks to continuously improve processes through regular review, feedback, and iterative improvements.

Verification and Validation: QA processes include various forms of testing, inspection, and review to verify that processes are being followed correctly and that the end product meets the desired quality.

Documentation: Proper documentation is a crucial part of QA. It ensures that processes are repeatable, traceable, and auditable.

QA vs. Quality Control (QC):
Quality Assurance is proactive, focusing on process management to prevent defects.
While Quality Control (QC) is reactive, focusing on identifying and fixing defects in the final product.

In systems engineering, including software development, QA is essential to ensure that the systems or software meet functional and non-functional requirements, are reliable, and meet customer expectations.

A Look at Mazda vs. Ford Transmissions' Quality

To gain insight into the significance of quality assurance in the requirements management phase of the lifecycle, let's delve into a case study comparing transmission quality between two rival automotive companies.

In the 80s Ford owned roughly 25% of Mazda (then known as Toyo Koygo) and had Mazda manufacture some automatic transmissions for cars sold in the United States. Both Ford and Mazda were building the same transmission off of the same specification and both had 100% specification conformance.

However, the Ford transmissions were receiving more customer complaints about noise and were having higher warranty repair costs. This lead Ford engineers to investigate and they found that the Ford manufactured transmissions utilized 70% of the available tolerance spread for manufactured parts, while Mazda used only 27% (AC 2012-4265: Promoting Awareness in Manufacturing Students of Key Concepts of Lean Design to Improve Manufacturing Quality). The Ford engineers then began to realize that the Mazda transmissions were of better quality then the Ford manufactured ones. It turned out that Mazda was using a slightly more expensive grinding process then what Ford was using. This raised Mazda’s manufacturing costs, however the full lifetime costs were higher for the Ford manufactured transmissions.

This story is a prime example of why it is important to be thinking about quality control. Too often we tend to focus on another metric and neglect quality, or we use a single metric to define quality. Ford experienced this by focusing on a “Zero Defect” policy, thinking that if there were zero defect in a transmission that would produce a quality transmission. Mazda expanded on this policy and took the whole lifecycle cost and experience into consideration as they developed their transmissions. With this holistic view, it is easy to see why engineers need to think about quality all across a program’s lifecycle.

Building Quality into The Lifecycle

If the goal of an organization is to deliver a quality product, engineers at all stages need to think about how they can add quality into the system. An easy way to think about how to add quality, is what are the extra details, the extra effort, the extra care that can be put into the product. When these extra efforts are applied to a properly defined system, the output is often a quality system. To a program manager all the extra effort sounds like a fair amount of extra cost. This is true, however it is important to weigh the short term cost increase against the potential long term costs savings. Below are two examples of how to add quality in the lifecycle.

Requirements Management

One of the first steps of the design effort is requirement management. Unfortunately having a requirement like “system shall be of a quality design” will not help instill quality assurance. Not only would this requirement violate good requirement writing, it fails to take into account what are the characteristics of a quality system. Is it the spare no expense engineering efforts of high end audio systems or is it the good quality for the price factor of Japanese manufactured cars in the 1970s? It is important to identifying how the customer and market defines quality. Having this understanding informs choices going forward and prevents a scenario where the market doesn’t value the added quality efforts.

Related Article: How to Write Good Requirements

Verification and Validation of the Procurement and Manufacturing

The procurement/manufacturing phase of the lifecycle is where quality efforts are the most visible. As parts are being ordered it is important to be thinking about how the whole supply chain thinks about quality. This involves reviewing the supplier’s suppliers to verify that the parts being delivered are not of poor design were a possible defect could be hidden through integration. For internally manufactured parts, is extra effort being added to check that the solder on pins is clean and will not short other sections under heating? Extra though and care should also be given to the human interface of the system, as this normally plays a major role in determining the quality of a system. For software, do user interfaces make sense, do they flow, are they visually appealing? These are the kinds of questions that should be asked during the requirements gathering phase to help guild engineers to building a quality system.

Related Article: 9 Methods to Gather Requirements

“Quality Is Our Top Priority”

The  Scott Adams’ Dilbert comic strip below showcases a perfect example of Pointy-Haired Boss directing Dilbert, Alice, and Wally to focus on quality.

DILBERT from Sunday March 28, 2004

What Pointy-Haired Boss fails to realize is that quality and the rest of his priorities are not mutually exclusive and can be done concurrently. A quality system is one that is safe, that is law abiding, and is financially viable. Quality should also be added to these factors, making sure that the extra bit of design work is worthwhile. All of these factors when properly combined together with good design and engineering produce a quality system.

Quality Assurance is not just a set of procedures but a philosophy that should be woven into every stage of a product's lifecycle. The examples from Mazda and Ford illustrate that quality goes beyond meeting specifications—it involves a holistic approach that considers long-term reliability, customer satisfaction, and overall lifecycle costs. By embedding quality into the design, procurement, manufacturing, and even the user experience, organizations can avoid costly defects and deliver superior products.

Incorporating quality from the outset may increase short-term costs, but the long-term benefits—such as reduced warranty claims, higher customer satisfaction, and lower total cost of ownership—make it a worthwhile investment. Engineers, managers, and all stakeholders must recognize that quality is not just another box to check; it's an integral part of delivering a successful product. When quality becomes a top priority, alongside safety, compliance, and cost, it leads to systems that not only meet but exceed expectations, ultimately defining the brand's reputation in the marketplace.