The corporate world is strewn with examples when the stakeholders demonstrated guarded silence and let the ‘quality issue’ leak through the system which then led to huge Cost of Poor Quality (COPQ) reported in the field. Some of the debilitating consequences for the impacted company could be the ‘actual’ warranty cost shooting way above the budgeted provisions, reduced EBIT due to costly product recalls, reduced confidence of shareholders and stakeholders and most importantly loss of reputation.
If we look at the investigation of quality issues, made available in public domain, we can see products which did not meet the specifications, eventually were manufactured by the suppliers, and were then used by the OEM’s in their products. Suppliers, even though they knew of the problem did not blow the whistle, for fear of upsetting their largest customer (the OEM). We may have noticed instances of OEM’s attempting to cover up the defect by having their supplier fix the technical problem without changing the part number.
Big companies, in order to prevent such quality leaks have established elaborate Quality Assurance tools and methods in their staged gate product development processes, have made it a point to conduct periodic internal and external audits on its Quality Management Systems (QMS), product development and manufacturing processes. Besides, they have ensured there is a companywide quality focus, regular quality roadshows and quality walks. Furthermore they have created a platform for its employees to report any issue, including quality issue, with whistle blower program or ombudsman program ensuring that there will be no fear of retaliation.
Yet, such quality leakages, threatening not only the profit margins but the very existence of the companies keeps on coming and gets reported out in public domain at concerning frequency. And this is just a tip of iceberg. There will be so many issues that never gets reported by the companies (OEMs) due to one reason or the other.
Assuming the Quality Assurance process are adequately robust, and it can highlight quality issues, then it is obvious, that people did not stop and speak up when they saw quality issues on time.
They allowed or silently watched the quality issue tiptoeing out of their quality wall and moving on to the next stage.
So why did the concerned person/s intentionally remained silent or withheld the issue? Probably the same person may have been quite vocal in giving ideas during idea sessions or quality workshops for improvements. This clearly amplifies the fact that SPEAKING UP (voicing ideas) is quite different from STAYING SILENT (not voicing concerns)
The person/s remained intentionally silent probably because s/he felt “that problem (issue) is not my problem” or probably that person did not want to look ignorant, incompetent, intrusive or negative.
The other obvious reasons why people remain silent in speaking up on quality issues can be summed up in this table below.
As quality leaders, we need to eliminate this silence by providing psychological safety to employees who are responsible for overseeing quality. Psychological Safety is not a business buzzword for accelerating quality mindset. It needs to be implemented in both letter and spirit.
As Quality leaders we need to be aware, that psychological safety in not a freedom from conflict. It is neither a permission to slack off, nor a license to whine. We need to hear the voiced quality concern with an eye on the BIG picture. Not just how the ‘voiced quality concern’ can impact the time to market goal, but also the important goal of delivering to the customers, a product that exceeds the quality and reliability expectations and that improves the Net Promoter Score (NPS) of the company. It is important to mention psychological safety is not an end in itself. It is a means to the goal of Quality Excellence. Along with psychological safety, we need to inculcate a sense of urgency and commitment to Quality Excellence. We need to promote a culture that allows us to operate in the upper right corner of this model.
This quality culture change will take time for sure but definitely should be one of leadership responsibility. Once this culture starts blooming in the organization more and more employees across the organization will refrain from remaining silent. They will feel comfortable in speaking up and reporting the quality issues and will get a deep sense of pride that they have helped the company in reducing COPQ and earn the customer/s for life.
Dear Quality Leaders – This was my view. I will be delighted to hear your views on this topic
By SoumenDe
December 30, 2025
