Is There a Difference Between Quality and Performance?
 

Perhaps it is just semantics, but this is one line of reasoning that has always bugged me. I believe there is a difference between high quality and high performance and maybe it could be said that there is a difference between quality and performance in general. I define quality as a product or service that is consistent at providing an expected level of performance. I define performance as a product or service that meets a certain level or physical specification to achieve a work-end. High performance is defined as a product or service that exceeds the status quo and the expected level of work by all measures of a given criteria.

Let us take Honda – high quality cars. They are reliable and provide a level of consistency but they would not be considered high performance. I guess with that line of reasoning one would consider McDonalds to be a quality restaurant. You can go to a McDonalds in any part of the country and the Big Mac would taste the same. The layout would be consistent and the playground would even look the same. To the typical adult McDonalds is not ‘quality’ food but to a 7 year old or somebody that is starving then Mickey Ds looks like a Morton’s or a Ruth’s Chris. You always get what you expect to get = high quality.

Let us take Ferrari – high performance cars. Not many cars on the road can keep up with their handling or speed. Do Ferrari’s perform consistently at that level of high performance? I do not think so (but I will stand corrected). I suspect that they require constant maintenance in order to achieve that level of performance. Therefore, they cannot be considered high quality. Ferrari’s handle and excel and even brake and slalom better then most all cars on the road = high performance.


So, am I missing the point here?

PERVERT!

Oh sorry... I thought you were talking about something else.

Interesting how Porsche falls into you automobile analogy... quality and performance?

However I think your Micky D's analogy falls through, consistently bad food does not equal high quality, acceptable if you're starving or a seven year old who doesn't know any better but not high quality.

Porsche may just be a rare example of high quaility and high performance. As for Micky Ds, you just have a higher level of expectations is all - comes from living large and striving for excellence!

Sure there is. But, then there isn't.

Watches. They all keep about the same time, but the quality difference is astounding.

Time/use is a huge factor in most manufactured products...quality often becomes apparent after age and use.

Why do you ask?

My Wife wants a bike so she can keep up with our Son - her rollar blading isn't. Shes good but he is a speed nut. So we started talking about getting her one - going to Target to get a Huffy or the bike shop and get her a Fuji like I have (She is way too short to ride my bike). There is also Schwinn (sp) which I think is a good brand - least it was when I had one in grade school through the endorsement of Capt. Kangaroo!

Trek.


Still riding my 1990.

Yikes! High quality and high performance bikes....I'm afraid that you have opened a can of worms here. Watches and bikes, the minutia is overwelming.

I agree that Porsche is that rare combination of high quality and high performance. A relatively bulletproof car (ala Honda/Toyota) that is fun to drive.

Honda not high performance? You've got to be kidding me. Who do you think dominates Formula 1? Toyota and Honda. Who kicks ass at Indy? cars with Toyota engines. In terms of horsepower/liter, they are right up there with many other cars. I think you can wring 200+ hp out of a two something liter Honda easily with bolt-ons and no nitrous.

Hugh - good point. maybe I should change my example to a top fuel dragster vs a camry

Actually, I'll go back to my original premise. Honda and Toyota do make serious high performance engines but not for off-the-lot purchase. The engines they make for Indy and F1 still would not be effective around town and they would require some serious wrench time.

It boils down to operating criteria for a given item.

Quality is a product that is consistant at providing an expected level of performance? Does that mean that a cheapo phillips screwdriver that you expect to round off quickly and become useless with brief usage and does just that, is equal on a quality standpoint to a Snap-On that lasts for decades (as expected), but that the Snap-On is a high perfromance screwdriver?

No - the tool or machine has an expected level of performance not the brand.

Quality versus performance hmmmmm . Ever had good sex with an ugly chick?

Never had bad sex, I guess...:rolleyes:

Then your McDonald's example falls flat, as we are comparing Big Macs to hamburgers, and in that light the food is of poor quality indeed.

Can the waranty affect the quality of a product? If you buy an expensive bike, and a defect is discovered, would the willingness of the vendor to correct the defect impact your perception of the level to which the product meets your expectations?

On the whole I agree that quality and performance are separate entities, quality being of a more subjective nature, and performance more objective.

Taz - great insights!

As for the hamburger analogy, I have had excellent burgers (Louies in New Haven to think of one) and really bad ones as well (White Castle). I can't find many chain Louies and I haven't eaten enough to know how consistantly tasty they are. Fastfood has a certain level of expectation and that level of expectation is the criteria. If you were to try to measure the criteria and compare then a 'specification' would have to extablished. Laugh now but you already have specifications in place for fastfood you just don't relize it. If you do go to them (and I suspect you may from time to time - but I could be wrong) then your level of acceptability is such that the place has to be clean, safe, well known and inexpensive. That is a specification that even has quantifible values - they are a bit subjective but actually companies like Brinker Int and Yum Inc have a great understanding of what people will tolerate and what they won't right down to the amount of napkins or parking places available.

Warrentees affecting quality? Excellent point! I would argue that warrentee and other value added contribuations should be included in quality and performance criteria. The challenge with your premise is that when your item breaks it is covered without any direct expense to the owner but there is the indirect cost pools to think about. My Lambo breaks down and I get a free tow and fix but if it is doing it every other week then its starts to cut into my sports agency business - thats money outa my pocket unless Lambo was to re-coop my loss.

As for quality being subjective, don't tell that to RedBeard, he is a practitioner of the Black Art of Sick Sigma (as was I many a moon ago!).

Great discussion though - really making me think this through for nothing else then to keep the blood to the brain flowing!

IMO, it is a question of parellells between quality and performance - not differences.

The two are inseperable. I went from an old 911 to a new Subaru WRX. Everyting is negotiable.

I'm back off to the smoke shed kids......

Performance is easier to measure (0-60, x" group @100 yds, 3.15 ERA etc). Quality a bit trickier. See "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintaince".
Jim

Performance = 0-62 in 5 sec.

Quality = repeating that many times without braking.