Project Quality Management
Several arguments have been put forward towards the claim and literature that quality product and service provision forms the core of a firm’s or a company’s competitive advantage. Critical arguments with baseline on the thought that initiatives for product and service quality that several firms undertake are the cornerstone of gaining competition power globally. In the supply chain and other business settings, quality is recognized as the primary driver behind successful competition power and therefore, this has rendered several organizations to take product quality as prime concern to gain competition advantage (Lakhal, 2009). What remains debatable is whether it is true that quality provides organizations to be competitively at par with other firms. The key importance of quality in firm are cost benefits, competitive advantage, innovation and delivery dependability among other benefits.
However, some researchers would suggest that quality does not form the core of gaining competitive advantages. Why would someone argue in this direction? Such arguments are formed on the basis of the norm that producing quality service may be the only factor that would favor sales and hence competitively making such firms superior. I would suggest that gaining market competitive advantage entails just more than quality. A number of factors should be considered. It is therefore better to define competition advantage as it sets a firm to gain large market control through commodity production or service delivery at a lower and favorable cost than their counterparts.
There is enough evidence to support the claim that quality service and product delivery by a firm is a first means of gaining customer loyalty. Quality of service and product to customer is one critical aspects to consider in drawing loyalty and satisfaction of the customers. In the twenty first century, organization are solely dependent on decision making. The importance of quality in an organization is sound in several ways. For example, under normal situations, quality of service or product implies consistency of the customer. In most cases, customers are satisfied in case their first purchase is of quality and meets their demands. However, the only situation that inconsistency may pop in is when quality improves. This is argument is based on the assumption that going below the defined or initial quality standards puts the business at risk of losing customer loyalty and consistency in running business today ((Lakhal, 2009).
Moreover, quality is a broader term that includes management competencies and cost benefits analysis. Under normal circumstances, an organization is termed to be economically advantaged if it has the best management team to drive quality production of services and products at lower costs than their competitors. This clearly justifies that a firm with good and quality management will ensure them earn competitive advantage in the market. To run business in the twenty first century, I would recommend that management consider and give priority to quality in order to be competitively well off in the market by setting proper rates and working smart.
However, despite the fact that competitive advantage in the market in terms of cost, loyalty and market control solely lie with what level of quality a firm maintains, some scholars will tend to counter-argue that quality does not imply competitive advantage. Why would such argument be semi-valid? This argument can be backed with several evidences. For example, quality provision of quality and services are always target at achieving loyalty and trust of customers.
In general, it is valid to claim that ensuring quality in an organization through quality product and service provision is key in gaining competitive advantage in the market. Even in the twenty first century, market competition all lies with quality management, service and products, as well as cost effective production to be better placed in terms of competition with other market parties. I strongly believe that quality is key in driving firm competitive strength in a market. Also, in terms of cost of management and production, quality defines effective cost-production as producing services and products at relatively lower cost than the competitors. I therefore staunchly believe and support that argument that quality is key is attaining competitive advantage over other firms or organizations in similar product or service market. In addition to quality of service or products, quality encompasses other factors such as management competencies, quality work and consistency in a particular market.
Lakhal, L. (2009). Impact of Quality on Competitive Advantage and Organizational Performance. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 60(5), 637-645. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40206780