Eight dimensions of quality

Garvin's dimensions were collated to reflect his observation that "few companies ... have learned to compete on quality".

Garvin, who died on 30 April 2017,[2] was posthumously honored with the prestigious award for 'Outstanding Contribution to the Case Method' on 4 March 2018.

This dimension of quality involves measurable attributes, so brands can usually be ranked objectively on individual aspects of performance.

Similar thinking can be applied to features, a second dimensions of quality that is often a secondary aspect of performance.

Examples include free drinks on a plane, permanent-press cycles on a washing machine, and automatic tuners on a color television set.

Reliability is a major contributor to brand or company image, and is considered a fundamental dimension of quality by most end-users.

For example, recent market research shows that, especially for women, reliability has become an automobile's most desired attribute.

[1] The dimension of conformance depicts to what extent a product’s design and operating characteristics meet established standards.

This approach requires a fresh look at the common process quality factor of 'defect rate', to take into account the fact that two parts may each pass the 'tolerance test' separately but be unusable when the attempt is made to join them together.

In service businesses, measures of conformance normally focus on accuracy and timeliness and include counts of processing errors, unanticipated delays and other frequent mistakes.

Garvin noted that economists call such products "one-hoss shays", after the carriage in Oliver Wendel Holmes' poem, The wonderful one-hoss-shay.

[7] In other cases, consumers must weigh the expected cost, in both dollars and personal inconvenience, of future repairs against the investment and operating expenses of a newer, more reliable model.

A product that often fails is likely to be scrapped earlier than one that is more reliable; repair costs will be correspondingly higher and the purchase of a competitive brand will look that much more desirable.

Companies differ widely in their approaches to complaint handling and in the importance they attach to this element of serviceability.

Some do their best to resolve complaints; others use legal gimmicks, the silent treatment and similar ploys to rebuff dissatisfied customers.

For example, recently,[8] General Electric, Procter & Gamble and other companies have sought to preempt consumer dissatisfaction by installing toll-free telephone hot lines to their customer relations departments.

Faults or defects in a product that diminish its aesthetic properties, even those that do not reduce or alter other dimensions of quality, are often cause for rejection.

Consumers do not always have complete information about a product's or service's attributes; indirect measures may be their only basis for comparing brands.

In such circumstances, images, advertising and brand names -inferences about quality rather than the reality itself- can be critical.