DO |
DON’T |
| Get the purpose and the strategy clear at the start | Go it alone - seek accounting ( or engineering ) help as appropriate |
| Report only costs produced or endorsed by accounts department | Expect accountants to take the the initiative |
| Get data and costs from standard data wherever possible | Expect that standard accounting systems will yield the information needed |
| Seek independent corroboration of any data which is doubtful | Expect accountants to arbitrate on what is, or not, quality related |
| Start with failure costs | Underestimate the difficulties with definitions of quality costs |
| Consider appraisal costs as a target for cost reduction | Be too ambitious - start small |
| Consider ease of collection and start with the easiest | Expect too much from the first attempt |
| Refine large costs rather than attempt to quantify small unknown costs | Lose sight of the fact that it is primarily a cost collection exercise |
| Concentrate on costs that do or can change with quality | Agonize over relatively trifling costs |
| Analyze and report costs clearly in a business context | Use guesses - not even informed guesses |
| Treat " economic cost of quality " models with suspicion | Make comparisons unless you can guarantee comparability |
| When cost information is available analyze it | Assume straightforward operations will necessarily be easy to cost |
| Attribute costs to; department; defect type; product; cause; supplier | Deduct from quality costs income from scrap |
| Identify responsibility for costs with functions and people | Forget that prevention is the most difficult category to cost |
| Rank problems and cost reduction projects by size and importance | Concentrate exclusively on what is already known |
| Integrate the collection, analysis and reporting of quality related costs into the company accounting system | Be constrained by the traditional prevention - appraisal -failure categorization of quality costs |
| KEEP PAPERWORK TO THE MINIMUM |