Quality Engineering

ISSN: 0898-2112 (Print) 1532-4222 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lqen20

Quality 4.0—the challenging future of quality

engineering

Avigdor Zonnenshain & Ron S. Kenett

To cite this article: Avigdor Zonnenshain & Ron S. Kenett (2020): Quality 4.0—the challenging
future of quality engineering, Quality Engineering, DOI: 10.1080/08982112.2019.1706744

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/08982112.2019.1706744

Published online: 27 Feb 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 282

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=lqen20
QUALITY ENGINEERING
https://doi.org/10.1080/08982112.2019.1706744

Quality 4.0—the challenging future of quality engineering

Avigdor Zonnenshain and Ron S. Kenett
Center for Industrial Excellence, Technion, The Samuel Neaman Institute for National Policy Research, Haifa, Israel

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Quality is a crucial dimension of products and processes. It is considered a competitive fourth industrial revolution;
advantage for companies and organizations in the global market. Quality models and practi- data driven; evidence
ces went through several evolutionary steps during modern history—from inspection to con- based; modeling and
simulation; health
trol, to quality assurance, to quality management and quality by design. These quality monitoring; integrated
models follow the evolutions and revolutions in industry. It seems however, that in the last quality management;
few years the quality discipline went into stagnation—very few innovative models for quality maturity assessment;
are being proposed and quality professionals in companies and organization have apparently information quality
lost their leadership positions. Also, the research for new and innovative quality models is
scarce. The fourth industrial revolution is an opportunity for the quality movement to
become a leading force. This poses significant challenges to the quality profession by empha-
sizing the need to adapt to technology innovations, to modern data analytics and to the
entrepreneurships ecosystem that characterize an era of the fourth industrial revolution. In
this paper, we present a framework for a quality discipline supporting the fourth industrial
revolution. We propose to call it Quality 4.0. The paper also offers future directions for quality
and reliability engineering that leverage opportunities derived from the fourth industrial
revolution. Specifically, we discuss: (1) Quality as a data driven discipline, (2) the application
of modeling and simulation for evidence-based quality engineering, (3) health monitoring
and prognostics for quality, (4) integrated quality management, (5) maturity levels with
respect to the fourth industrial revolution, (6) integrating innovation with quality and manag-
ing for innovation, (7) Quality 4.0 and data science, (8) integrating reliability engineering with
quality engineering, and finally, (9) information quality. We are aware that these directions
are still not a comprehensive picture of Quality 4.0. We claim however, that they constitute a
substantial basis to update the body of knowledge and practices of the quality profession.

Background from inspection to quality control, to quality assur-

During the last decade, industries in advanced econo-
mies have experienced significant changes in their
engineering and manufacturing practices, processes,
and technologies. These changes have the potential to
create a resurgence of their engineering and manufac-
turing activities. This phenomenon is often referred to
as the Fourth Industrial Revolution or Industry 4.0. It
is based on advanced manufacturing and engineering
technologies, massive digitization, big data analytics,
advanced robotics, adaptive automation, additive and
precision manufacturing (e.g., 3D printing), modeling
and simulation, artificial intelligence, and nano-engineer-
ing of materials. This revolution presents challenges and
opportunities to the systems, manufacturing, analytics
and process engineering disciplines.
The quality models, approaches and practices went
through several movements during modern history—
ance, to quality management and quality by design.
Famous quality initiatives adopted worldwide
included Total Quality Management, Six Sigma, Lean
Sigma and Quality by Design. These quality move-
ments were led by well-known experts like Shewhart,
Deming, Juran, Taguchi and others who established a
basis for the quality approach practiced in industry,
business and public service sectors.
It seems however, that in the last few years the qual-
ity discipline went into stagnation—very little innovative
models for quality are being proposed and the quality
professionals in companies and organization have appar-
ently lost their leadership positions. Overall, the interest
in quality engineering has dropped since 2004 by 70%
in Google searches (see Figure 1, upper pane). In con-
tract data analytics has seen a 20-fold increase relative to
quality engineering (Figure 1, lower pane).

CONTACT Avigdor Zonnenshain avigdorz100@gmail.com The Samuel Neaman Institute for National Policy Research, Center for Industrial
Excellence, Technion, Haifa, Israel.
ß 2020 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 A. ZONNENSHAIN AND R. S. KENETT

Figure 1. Data from Google trends for “Quality engineering” (upper pane) https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&
q=Quality%20engineering … and stacked in comparison with “Data analytics” (lower pane) https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?
date=all&geo=US&q=quality%20engineering,data%20analytics … Graphs made with JMP v15 (www.jmp.com … ) using US data.

The fourth industrial revolution is an opportunity
for the quality movement to become relevant again
and return to a leading role. This poses significant
challenge to the quality profession by emphasizing
the need to adapt to technology innovations, to
modern data analytics and to the entrepreneurships
ecosystem that characterize the era of the Fourth
Industrial Revolution.
In this paper we present a framework for the quality
discipline supporting the fourth Industrial Revolution.
Among other points, we refer to the important role of
quality engineering in this era of a digital transform-
ation. As a context to this position paper, we first pro-
vide an overview of evolutionary phases in industry.
The evolution of industry
In this section we track the journey of industry from
the first to the fourth industrial revolution. This part
is adapted from Kenett and Redman (2019). We
emphasize here the evolution of quality models and
the role of integrated models as presented in Godfrey

and Kenett (2007), Kenett and Zacks (2014) and
Kenett and Shmueli (2016). The journey we describe
moves from product quality, to process quality, man-
agement quality and quality by design, up to informa-
tion Quality.
The first industrial revolution
In medieval Europe, most families and social groups
made their own goods such as cloth, utensils, and
other household items. Feudal lords and professional
guilds affixed their marks to the fabric, which came to
stand for their levels of quality. Quality control activ-
ities generated data that was aggregated in ledgers for
accounting and planning purposes (Juran 1995).
The second industrial revolution
During the early 20th century, a constellation of tech-
nologies and management techniques expanded mass
production. The Taylor System, featuring time and
motion studies drove production tasks and productiv-
ity quotas. And companies learned how to manage
enormous factories (Chandler 1993). This was the
second industrial revolution. Walter Shewhart, a phys-
icists, engineer and statistician, proposed to control
manufacturing processes using a statistical tool, con-
trol charts (Shewhart 1926). Process control with con-
trol charts minimized the need for inspection, saving
time and money and delivering higher quality. W.
Edwards Deming and Joseph M. Juran were instru-
mental in bringing this approach to Japan in the
1950s. Deming emphasized the use of statistical think-
ing (Deming 1982), and Juran developed a compre-
hensive management system featuring the so-called
quality trilogy of planning, improving and control
(Juran 1986, Godfrey and Kenett 2007). Like
Shewhart, both worked for Western Electric in the
late 1920s. From a data analysis perspective, attention
shifted from inspection to process performance and
the need to understand variation. Thus, statistical
models and probability started playing a key role.
The third industrial revolution
The third industrial revolution is due to the advent of
computers. Computers enabled “mass customization”
(Davis 1997). Essentially mass customization combines
the scale of large, continuous flow production systems
with the flexibility of a job shop. This allows a mas-
sive effort, with batches of size one. After coming up
with an initial design concept, design engineers use
QUALITY ENGINEERING 3
computer simulation to evaluate the impact of vari-
ability of material, manufacturing processes and oper-
ating conditions on their proposed design. The design
is then iteratively improved based on these results. In
parallel to system design, purchasing specialists and
industrial engineers proceed with specifying and
ordering the necessary raw materials, setting up the
manufacturing processes, and scheduling production
using computer-aided manufacturing tools (CAM).
Then, throughout manufacturing, tests provide the
necessary production controls. Finally, computer-
integrated manufacturing pulls everything together.
Ultimately, of course, the objective is to minimize the
costly impact of failures in a product after delivery to
the customer. Computer simulation experiments
require new experimental designs, including Latin
Hypercubes and Kriging (Gaussian) models. For details
on these methods see Kenett and Zacks (2014).
The fourth industrial revolution; the industry 4.0
transformation
The fourth industrial revolution is fueled by data from
sensors and internet of things (IoT) devices and pow-
ered by increasing computer power. The Internet of
things (IoT) is the extension of Internet connectivity
into physical devices and everyday objects. Embedded
with electronics, Internet connectivity, and other forms
of hardware (such as sensors), these devices can com-
municate and interact with others over the Internet, and
they can be remotely monitored and controlled
(Acharjya and Geetha 2017). Information technology,
telecommunications and manufacturing are merging,
and production is increasingly autonomous. There are
many implications for data scientists. According to IDC
(2018) the top analytical technologies include:
 Natural language generation, natural language
processing and text mining,
 Speech recognition,
 Virtual agents,
 Machine learning (ML) platforms,
 Artificial intelligence (AI)—optimized hardware, and
 Decision management.
For examples of such applications and the role of big
data, novel technologies and modern data analytics,
quality and systems engineering see Kenett, Swarz, and
Zonnenshain (2020).
According to a survey by AT Kearney (Krubasik
et al. 2015), the current share of companies applying
advanced quality methodologies in industry 4.0 is still
4 A. ZONNENSHAIN AND R. S. KENETT
relatively low (27%) but the share of responders who
believe in high benefits of innovative quality is rela-
tively high (73%).
On the basis of this background of industrial eco-
systems, we proceed with a description of the evolu-
tion of quality models. The next section emphasizes
some aspects of such models, without attempting to
be comprehensive.
The evolution of quality
In tracking the evolution of quality models, we high-
light several milestones over time. A first step on this
journey can be found in the first book of the Old
Testament. On the sixth day, the Creator completed
his work and invoked inspection to determine if fur-
ther action was needed. The thirty-first verse of
Genesis reads: And God saw everything that he had
made, and, behold, it was very good (Genesis 1, 31).
Inspection was indeed the leading quality model for
many centuries.
A second important milestone, where specification
of parts is set before final assembly, is attributed to
Eli Whitney (1765-1825), an American inventor,
mechanical engineer, and manufacturer. Whitney is
remembered as the inventor of the cotton gin for
developing the concept of mass production of inter-
changeable parts. In 1797, the US government threat-
ened by war with France, solicited 40,000 muskets
from private contractors because the two national
armories had produced only 1,000 muskets in three
years. Whitney offered to supply 10,000 muskets in
two years. He designed machine tools by which an
unskilled workman made only a particular part that
was checked against specification. The sum of such
parts was a musket. Any part would fit any musket of
that design.
A third milestone, 120 years later, was the introduc-
tion of statistical process control charts by Walter
Shewhart mentioned in section 2.2 (Shewhart 1926).
Following this milestone, attention had shifted from
quality of product to process quality. Sixty years later,
on the basis of experience gained at Western Electric
where Shewhart worked, Joseph Juran formulated his
Quality Trilogy, a universal approach to managing for
quality. This marked the start or the era of quality
management. Other disciplines involved in this revo-
lution include industrial engineering, operations man-
agement, supply-chain management with overall
objectives of achieving improvements in quality,
speed, delivery dependability, flexibility and costs. A
key contributor to this movement was W. Edwards
Deming who, together with Juran, had huge success
in implementing quality management principles in
devastated post world War II Japan (Deming 1982,
1986, Juran 1986, 1995). Deming’s original publication
was titled Quality, Productivity and the Competitive
Position. The methods of quality management have
also been applied to services such as healthcare, bank-
ing and education.
In the 1960s, a Japanese engineer, Genichi Taguchi,
introduced to industry methods for generating statis-
tically designed experiments aimed at improving prod-
ucts and processes by achieving design-based
robustness properties (Godfrey 1986, Taguchi 1987).
These methods where originally suggested by R. A.
Fisher, the founder of modern statistics in agriculture
and greatly developed in the chemical industry, by his
student G.E.P Box (Fisher 1935, Box, Hunter, and
Hunter 2006). In 1981 Taguchi came to Bell
Laboratories, the research arm of Western Electric, to
share his experience in robust design methodologies.
His seminars in Holmdel, New Jersey were attended
by only a dozen people. His English was poor and his
ideas so new that it took time to understand his
methods. At that time, industry was mostly collecting
data on finished product characteristics with some
data on processes. Thirty years later, industry started
facing the big data phenomena. Sensors and modern
data analysis systems now offer new options for pro-
cess and product control. This led to considerations of
integrated models combining data from different sour-
ces (Godfrey and Kenett 2007). With data analytics
and manufacturing execution systems (MES) the busi-
ness of quality started shifting to information Quality.
To handle this, Kenett and Shmueli introduced a
framework labeled “InfoQ” (see Kenett and Shmueli
2016). Technically, the definition of InfoQ is the
derived utility (U) from an application of a statistical
or data analytic model (f), to a data set (X), given the
research goal (g). On this basis, Quality professionals
have a framework to help organizations generate
information Quality from their data. A road map for
applied data sciences supporting sustainability in
advanced manufacturing with the information Quality
dimensions is proposed in Kenett and Shmueli (2016).
A comprehensive application of information quality to
chemical process engineering is presented in Reis and
Kenett (2018).
Organizations started hiring data scientists to lever-
age the potential in their data. In some way, data sci-
entists started getting involved in organizational
infrastructures and data quality. For a book focused
on The Real Work of Data Science, see Kenett and

Redman (2019). An additional development is the
renewed role of system engineering. We suggest here
that data science, quality engineering and system
engineering need to find ways to better interact. For
an edited book on Systems Engineering in the Fourth
Industrial Revolution: Big data, Novel Technologies,
and Modern Systems Engineering, see Kenett, Swarz,
and Zonnenshain (2020).
In summary, Quality models evolved through the
following milestones: (1) Product Quality, (2) Process
Quality, (3) Service Quality, (4) Management Quality,
(5) Design Quality and (6) Information Quality. The
next section builds on this evolution and offers a
response to the needs of modern industry and services
in terms of updated Quality activities.
A framework for quality 4.0
Several authors raised questions on the future of the
Quality profession (e.g., Sorqvist 2014). These questions
are raised due to changes in the market and its ecosys-
tem as outlined in the previous section. To address these
questions and challenges we outline here a framework
for quality engineering which we call Quality 4.0.
There are several ways to develop and define
Quality 4.0 framework. It can be based on shifting
from products to services, on value creation to the
markets and on the quality of business models, and
more. Zairi (2017) is suggesting such a response to
the crisis of the quality profession. He proposes that
the quality profession needs a new quality DNA by
changing the way of understanding of quality as a
concept and the notion of customer satisfaction, by
using disruptive thinking for catching up with the
evolutions in the business world, especially the digital
revolution for proactive pursuit of excellence and
quality leadership, by transforming the meaning of
strategy in the role of quality to reflect the need for
agility and flexibility and to focus on continuous cre-
ation, development, adaptation and capability of deliv-
ery by the companies as open systems. Zairi suggests
the following framework for the new quality revolu-
tion which is called by him Quality Mark II: The dis-
covery as the propelling force; the value creation
generator which includes: personalization, perfection,
partnership, prediction and delivery; the business
renewal rocket which includes: experience, engage-
ment, experimentation, enlightenment, disruption and
distinction.
In this paper we present a framework of applied and
practical topics that can fill the bigger context of Quality
4.0 based on the innovation elements of Industry 4.0.
QUALITY ENGINEERING 5
We describe below the key elements of this comprehen-
sive proposal.
Quality as a data driven discipline
Through this paper we observe that one of the
important features of the fourth industrial revolution
is being data driven. Kenett and Redman (2019)
devote a whole book to applying data science and to
how to turn data into information and better deci-
sions. Quality engineering activities should also be
data driven, as should be engineering requirements,
engineering calculations, testing, modeling and simu-
lations. We make this statement because, too often,
quality engineers make their decisions using only
intuition and/or qualitative assessments. The fourth
industrial revolution, with the availability of sensors
of various types and big data analytics, creates an
opportunity to be data driven. Kenett and Redman
(2019) describe characteristics of data-driven organiza-
tions. These traits can be applied to quality engineer-
ing as a discipline and/or to quality engineers as
decisions makers. For example:
 Bring as much diverse data and as many diverse
viewpoints to any situation as they possibly can
 Use data to develop deeper understanding of the
business context and the problem at hand
 Develop an appreciation for variation, both in data
and in the overall business
 Deal with uncertainty and the possibility that you
may make mistakes
 Recognize the importance of high-quality data and
invest in trusted sources and in making improvements
Also, academic research in quality engineering can
be advanced by introducing additional quantitative
data and evidence driven tools into the quality engin-
eering disciplines, which will support further develop-
ing quality engineering as a scientific and applied
discipline (Reis and Gins 2017).
Modeling and simulation for evidence based
quality engineering
Modern industry builds physical models or behavioral
models for almost any product, system, subsystem or
functional process. Such models are based on power-
ful computerized tools like MATLAB, Simulink,
modeFRONTIER (Ayele, Gur, and Rosen 2013), LS-
DYNA (Dorsselaer et al. 2019), among others. These
models describe the product/system under
6 A. ZONNENSHAIN AND R. S. KENETT
development for any relevant stage of the life cycle.
The models provide engineers with quantitative data
on the performances of the products/systems based on
domain specific expertise. The models are used for
simulating the behavior of products/systems for differ-
ent internal and external inputs. Through these simu-
lations, it is possible to evaluate design alternatives to
find better design solutions and to support design for
robustness, quality, reliability, and safety.
During the modeling and simulation phase, it is
possible to rapidly prepare prototypes based on the
current model. These prototypes can be produced by
traditional manufacturing or 3D printing based on the
model. Testing the prototypes in different scenarios is
the first step for validating the quality of the prod-
ucts/systems and its models.
In later stages of the development process, there
are product/system tests in selected points of the
design and operation of the product/system. The out-
comes of these tests are compared to simulation
results to validate the product/system models and ver-
ify the quality of the design.
So, modeling and simulation are very crucial tools
for the quality engineers and should be integrated
into the quality engineering process.
The models provide additional advantages and
benefits for quality engineering in the new era.
Some of these are:
 The models are considered the “truth” about the
product parameters and behavior. The model
should be validated and considered a documenta-
tion of the product.
 The models enhance data analytic capabilities by
creating valuable data through simulations.
 The models are also a source for process engineer-
ing. They shorten the manufacturing engineering
stage and save many misunderstandings and faults
along the manufacturing and integration chain.
 It is also possible to generate automatic product
simulation software code. It eliminates the manual
effort of coding from design, therefore, accelerating
the development process while decreasing the
chance of errors when compared to manual coding
from requirements. The models support and ease
the possible changes along the products lifecycle
 The simulation models can also be used for prepar-
ing the operation and training material for manufac-
turing, operating and maintaining the products.
 In the view of the fourth industrial revolution and the
goal of data-driven and evidence-based quality engin-
eering, the modeling and simulations activities are an
essential part of it. Kenett and Zacks (2014) introduce
computer experiments, Reis and Kenett (2017) show
how simulators can be used in training programs.
Prognostics for quality
With the emergence of Industry 4.0 and the Big Data
movement, industry is presented with unique oppor-
tunities to move performance to a new and higher
level. Here, performance is taken in its widest sense,
from operational, economic, and market-related
aspects to process, product, safety, quality, reliability
and environmental considerations.
Reis and Gins (2017) discuss this trend for indus-
trial process monitoring (IPM) in chemical process
engineering and show that quality engineering is an
important process and crucial system in many compa-
nies which are developing, producing, delivering, and
maintaining advanced products and systems.
The key enablers for this strategic shift are big
data, technology, and data analytics. Big data are pos-
sible because of the development of better, faster,
inexpensive, and more informative sensing technology
(sensors), which are able to collect information from
multiple sources in order to store it in integrated
databases and make it available anywhere and at any
time to engineers, operators and decision makers.
Technologies also provide the computational resources
(high performance computing, cloud services, distrib-
uted and parallel computing) required to process large
amounts of data using the advanced analytics capabil-
ities (the third enabler), turning them into actionable
information, in a timely and useful manner.
Up to now, the detection and diagnosis of processes
and failures and anomalies is dominated by processes
control. However due to advanced sensing technologies
and advanced analytics capabilities we see an important
shift to prognostics of processes conditions and quality
characteristics. This enables us to measure and predict
the quality of systems and products far in advance of
those provided by traditional preventive approaches.
Given that, there is a great potential of quality
engineering shifting into prognostic mode through the
following activities. Some examples of Prognostics
Health Monitoring (PHM) examples include:
 Introducing prognostic capabilities in the develop-
ment stage by using prognostics health management
in testing and experimenting with components, sub-
systems, and systems.
 Using PHM capabilities in demonstration and
life tests.

Figure 2. The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA) criteria.
 Integrating PHM capabilities into systems under
development as a design for maintenance policy
that enhances life cycle management, product qual-
ity, reliability and availability.
 Introducing condition-based maintenance in prod-
ucts under development as a proactive approach
for achieving product quality.
 Integrating PHM capabilities into the manufacturing
lines of systems and products under development.
Intelligent quality engineering based on PHM has
an essential positive impact on systems and products
through the application of advanced processes of qual-
ity engineering.
Integrated quality management
Business excellence models are well known frame-
works for advancing quality and excellence in compa-
nies and organizations through self and external
assessment. They are used in quality and excellence
national award programs, and in benchmarking activ-
ities against the winners of these program. The
Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA)
is the most famous quality and excellence award pro-
gram in the world. It was established by the U.S
Congress in 1987 and has been applied since then in
thousands of companies all the world. The MBNQA is
composed of 7 main criteria as presented in Figure 2:
The MBNQA criteria categories are: Leadership,
Strategy, Customers, Workforce, Operations and
Results. This framework is applied in companies and
organizations in six domains: Manufacturing, service
companies, small business, education, healthcare and
nonprofit. It is natural that the innovative approaches
and the applications of the smart technologies that are
part of the fourth industrial revolution will be inte-
grated into the MBNQA criteria. Following the
Industry Competence and Maturity for Advanced
Manufacturing (IMAM) framework that we developed
QUALITY ENGINEERING 7
for assessing the maturity level of companies for
advanced manufacturing (Chapter 21 in Kenett,
Swarz, and Zonnenshain 2020), we propose to add the
following sub- criteria into the main criteria areas:
 Leadership—Senior management is leading a pro-
cess of adapting, implementing and applying
advanced manufacturing technologies through
multiannual program
 Strategy—Our company has defined quantitative
and qualitative strategic goals for the development
of advanced manufacturing
 Customers—The communication and work with
the customers and the market are accomplished
through innovative and advanced information
technologies
 Operations—The various operational processes in
the plant are adapted to advanced manufacturing
technologies
 Workforce—The managers and workers are trained
for needed skills for advanced manufacturing
 Results—There is an analysis of productivity
improvement in the company due to implementa-
tion of technologies and methods of advanced
manufacturing
These changes in MBNQA criteria can become
important initiatives for advancing innovation through
state-of-the-art technologies. It is worth mentioning
that in 2019 MBNQA published a framework for
cybersecurity excellence.
The MBNQA criteria are applied in promoting
small and medium traditional industrial companies in
the northern region of Israel through by setting crite-
ria for improving quality and excellence. Since 2006,
more than 300 companies participated in this regional
quality program. The study of the contributions and
benefits of the program to the participating companies
(Bentolila et al. 2019), reveals that the companies
meet the quality goals of the program, but companies’
8 A. ZONNENSHAIN AND R. S. KENETT
managers’ report that it does not contribute to their
competitive advantage in the global market. One of
the assumed causes for this managerial assessment is
that these traditional companies do not apply innova-
tive approaches and advanced manufacturing technol-
ogies which are part of Industry 4.0 framework. Also,
the quality approach they implement, is the trad-
itional ones.
The next section describes the IMAM model, which
is integrating the MBNQA criteria with the Industry
4.0 elements, and experience gained from applying it.
Maturity levels toward the fourth industrial
revolution
Companies who want to improve their business using
opportunities embodied by the fourth industrial revo-
lution, need to assess (formally or informally) their
maturity levels in different business and operations
areas. Such an assessment can also serve companies as
a tool for benchmarking. The Industry Competence
and Maturity for Advanced Manufacturing (IMAM)
framework was developed and validated, and it consists
of an assessment tool based on the Software
Engineering Institute’s Capability Maturity Model
Integration (CMMI) approach. It is specifically
designed for assessing the maturity level of a company
in the area of Advanced Manufacturing and
Engineering. The IMAM model deals with different
application areas relevant for Advanced Manufacturing
and Engineering, including:
1. Strategy and long-term planning for advanced
manufacturing
2. Human resources for advanced manufacturing
3. Communication with customers and the market
4. Processes in manufacturing
5. Processes in engineering
6. Business processes
7. Processes in maintenance
8. Logistics processes
9. Processes in the supply chain
10. Processes in product life cycle
11. Information and knowledge management
12. Processes in cyber assurance
13. Investment in infrastructure and equipment
14. Actual improvement outcomes and results
In each of these areas, several possible actions and
activities can be considered by companies aiming
toward the advanced maturity level. For example, in
the category of Processes in Engineering, the following
questions can be considered:
 Our company has an engineering planning system
based on information technologies.
 Our company’s tools of engineering design are
computerized.
 Our company’s processes of engineering design
include modeling and simulations in the frame-
work of Model-Based Engineering (MBE).
 Our company uses simulations for statistical design
of experiments (DOE) as part of the design and
engineering processes.
 Our company smartly uses 3D printing for fast
prototyping, and for designing molds and dies.
 During the development and engineering of new
products and systems, our company considers the
use of new, advanced, and innovative materials
which are improving the products, the systems and
the manufacturing processes.
Similar maturity level assessment tools can be
developed for quality engineering areas in companies
aiming to upgrade their quality engineering processes
so that they meet the challenges of the fourth indus-
trial revolution. The IMAM model supports compa-
nies in assessing their strengths and weaknesses and
helps prepare an improvement plan. Also, IMAM pro-
vides companies with a tool for assessing their actual
improvements and achievements. In addition, it is an
effective benchmarking tool.
The IMAM model was validated with international
experts and fifteen companies in the north of Israel
(Chapter 21 in Kenett, Swarz, and Zonnenshain 2020).
Throughout this validation, the participating companies
identified their main strength as the communication with
the customers and the market, and their main weakness
as the lack of strategic planning for Industry 4.0.
The IMAM scale, derived from the model, can be
used for a self-assessment by management and as an
assessment tool for professional consultancy activities
involved in the process. For details see Kenett, Swarz,
and Zonnenshain (2020).
An additional perspective focused on analytic
maturity is presented in Kenett and Redman (2019).
It expands on the Quality Ladder described in
Chapter 1 of Kenett and Zacks (2014) which was
introduced in its 1998 first edition. The five levels
of the analytic maturity model, in increasing order
of maturity, are:
Level 1. Firefighting: random reports to be
delivered yesterday.
Level 2. Inspection: a focus on descriptive statistics.
Level 3. Process view: modeling variability with
statistical distributions.

Figure 3. The analytics maturity ladder (adapted, with permission, from Kenett and Redman 2019).
Level 4. Quality by design: planning interventions and
experiments for data gathering.
Level 5. Learning and discovery: a holistic view of
data science.
Neither Deming, Taguchi nor Juran anticipated the
Big Data era, with data coming from social media,
web clicks, “connected devices” (e.g., the Internet of
Things), personal trackers, and so forth. This new age
poses new challenges and opportunities and a higher
maturity level, which we call learning and discovery.
The opportunities for quality engineers are enormous,
including advanced process monitoring, optimized
maintenance and data-driven decision-making in gen-
eral. Figure 3 presents the 5 maturity levels with a brief
description of how data is used at each level proposed
in Kenett and Redman (2019). Our point here is that
the quality professional should see it part of his role to
push the organization to higher levels on this ladder.
Integrating innovation with quality and managing
for innovation
Introducing the fourth industrial revolution ideas and
technologies into companies can be considered as
introducing innovation into these companies. This
can be done and managed through quality tools and
approaches like innovation management standards or
quality improvements based on innovation initiatives.
There are several standards for innovation manage-
ment such as the Israeli Standard SI 7000 (2015), as
the Organizational Innovation Management—
Guideline is a guideline document for organizations
on how to manage innovation effectively, based on
the Idea Journey Model which represents the experi-
ence and knowledge of the Innovation Center at the
Technion, Haifa, Israel.
QUALITY ENGINEERING 9
There are ongoing international efforts to produce
standards and technical reports for Innovation
Management System, like:
 ISO TS 50500 Innovation Management System—
Fundamentals and vocabulary
 ISO TS 50501 Innovation Management
System—Guidance
 ISO TR 50502 Innovation Management—Assessment
 ISO TS 50503 Innovation Management—
Collaborative Partnerships
 ISO TS 50504 Innovation Management—Strategic
Intelligence Management
 ISO TS Innovation Management Intellectual
Property Management
These documents are produced by international
experts of the ISO/TC 279.
With recent failures of innovation teams to meet
their objectives in regard to product characteristics,
quality, and timetable, organizations have started to
integrate quality and reliability engineers, who are
assumed to be high on conformity and attention to
details, into R&D teams. However, their contribution
to innovation is being questioned by R&D managers
because they increase formality and rule-adherence
(Naveh 2007). The study in Miron-Spector, Erez, and
Naveh (2011) suggests that, although attentive-to-
detail members negatively impact radical innovation,
the contribution of conformist members can be valu-
able. Specifically, managers should set up teams that
have a significant number of creative members, to
form an innovative team culture; a large number of
conformists, to contribute to team harmony, reduce
conflict, and increase team potency; and no more
than a few attentive-to-detail members, given their
low tolerance of risk and mistakes. In the era of the
10 A. ZONNENSHAIN AND R. S. KENETT
fourth industrial revolution where innovation is a must
for the success of organizations, these integrative teams
are valuable forms “to get the best of all worlds.”
Quality 4.0 and data science
In 1962, John Tukey published a paper titled “The
Future of Data Analysis,” stating that “data analysis is
a very difficult field. It must adapt itself to what peo-
ple can and need to do with data.” The paper goes on
to describe much of what we now call data science.
Today’s data scientists are involved in a wide range of
applications such as production, development, cus-
tomer services, sales and financial predictive and
improvement efforts. Good data scientists work to dis-
cover hidden insights in vast quantities of often dis-
parate and often poor-quality data. It is a demanding
job. Still, good data scientists discover new insights
into customer needs, the causes of variability in proc-
esses, and how the business is performing. Chapter 2
in Kenett and Redman (2019) expands on this. In
some sense, the data scientist in modern organizations
is an updated version of what Deming referred to as a
“leader of statistical methods.” Deming proposed that:
“There will be in each division a statistician whose job
it is to find problems in that division, and work on
them. He has the right and obligation to ask questions
about any activity of the division, and he is entitled to
responsible answers” (Deming 1982). Building on
Deming’s thinking, putting data scientists “in the line”
is a great recommendation to make to organizations
aiming at leveraging the potential in the data they
accumulate (see also Hahn 2003). The quality profes-
sional should support this activity of data scientists.
Another option is to establish a corporate quality
function that assumes this role.
Integrating reliability engineering with quality
engineering
Developing prognostic and prescriptive analytic mod-
els requires knowledge and experience in reliability
engineering. System life distribution characteristics
and degradation models are only two such examples.
However, quality engineers typically lack knowledge
and experience in reliability engineering. This prob-
lematic situation is due to:
 Reliability engineering is not always recognized by
quality engineers as one of their core competencies.
 In most companies, reliability engineers and qual-
ity engineers operate in different “silos”.
 The added value of traditional reliability engineer-
ing activities for engineering has been called into
question. Specifically, the predictive performance
of reliability prediction models based on compo-
nents life distribution tables and field reliability, as
experienced by customers and service personnel, is
being questioned. . In a panel discussion on the
question “Is Reliability a Science?” (Singpurwalla
et al. 2019), the dilemma of the contribution of
reliability to engineering and technology was dis-
cussed. Like in this paper, the panel points to new
directions for updating the reliability engineer-
ing profession.
In order to meet the challenges of the fourth indus-
trial revolution one needs to integrate reliability
engineering with quality engineering through two par-
allel efforts:
 Upgrade the effectiveness of reliability engineering
for systems development by using the opportuni-
ties of the new era, like Big Data analytics,
Prognostics and Health Monitoring (PHM) and
modeling and simulation
 Integrate the reliability engineering processes with
the quality engineering processes
Zio (2016) proposes KID (Knowledge, Information,
and Data) for upgrading the effectiveness of reliability
engineering through several models such as:
 Degradation to failure modeling
 Integrating physics of failure knowledge in reliability
models by using Multi-State Physics-Based Models
 Accelerated Degradation Testing (ADT)
 Prognostics and Health Monitoring (PHM)
Modern reliability engineering tools include the
Design of Experiments (DOE), Design for Variability
(DFV) and Design for Manufacturing and Assembly
(DFM/A). See Freeman and Vining (2010), Reinman
et al. (2012) and Meeker and Hong (2014). All these
tools use data analytics based on field and testing
data. In this context, system testing becomes an
important source of data (Kenett, Faltin, et al. 2018).
Integrating reliability engineering into quality
engineering programs can be promoted through train-
ing of quality engineers in reliability engineering
based on the above models and based on data and
engineering models. Quality engineering programs
should therefore include reliability engineering pro-
grams. For a model linking field data with reliability

assessments at the development’s stages see Halabi,
Kenett, and Sacerdote (2017, 2018). Most of reliability
engineering models and practices deal with the assess-
ment of the probability of failure of components and
systems and predicting the life span of these compo-
nents and systems. It is claimed that in the new era of
innovative technologies we should analyze and predict
the evolution of technologies. The end of life of tech-
nologies is not due to physical failure, but due to out-
dated technology, or replacing technology by a new
one of the competitors. This new and challenging area
of evolution of technologies are described in Chapter
22 of Kenett, Swarz, and Zonnenshain (2020). It
presents an opportunity for the quality and reliability
engineering in the fourth industrial revolution.
Information quality
Big data in the 4th industrial revolution offers qual-
ity engineering a high potential for systems and
products designing, learning and modeling. The
main challenges are due to (i) a need for transition-
ing from considering the mean, to analyzing disper-
sion and correlation, (ii) from looking at stationary
systems, to consider dynamic and non-stationary sys-
tems, (iii) to move from sensor data to higher order
profiles and (iv) transition from monitoring, to diag-
nostic, prognostic and prescriptive analytics (Reis
and Kenett 2018).
Information Quality is an essential framework for
data-driven Quality engineering. It refers to a compre-
hensive framework designed to plan and assess the
level of information Quality provided by analytic tools
and methods in a company or a project. Information
Quality (InfoQ) is defined in Kenett and Shmueli
(2016) as the potential of a dataset to achieve a spe-
cific (scientific or practical) goal, using a given empir-
ical analysis method. InfoQ is different from data
quality and analysis quality but is dependent on these
components and on the relationship between them.
Formalizing the concept of information Quality
increases the value of data science, statistical analysis
and data-driven quality engineering, both methodo-
logically and practically. We suggest that the assess-
ment of information quality be made part of the tasks
of preparing organizations to be data driven.
Conclusions and summary
In this paper we consider future directions for quality
and reliability engineering that leverage opportunities
derived from the fourth industrial revolution.
Specifically, we discuss:
QUALITY ENGINEERING 11
 Quality as a Data-Driven Discipline
 Modeling and Simulation for Evidence Based
Quality Engineering
 Prognostics for Quality
 Integrated Quality Management
 Maturity Levels toward the Fourth Industrial Revolution
 Integrating Innovation with Quality and Managing
for Innovation
 Quality 4.0 and Data science
 Integrating Reliability Engineering with Quality
Engineering
 Information Quality
These topics represent a significantly updated body
of knowledge in Quality and reliability engineering
and affect what Quality and reliability engineers do,
and how they are trained.
These directions are still not the comprehensive
picture of Quality 4.0, but they form a basis to update
the current body of knowledge of Quality engineering.
They are motivated here by the needs of industrial
processes but are also relevant in-service delivery,
healthcare, education and government operations.
Although this paper emphasizes manufacturing appli-
cations, this wider scope with possible adaptations
applies to the MBNQA criteria.
Quality 4.0 is a framework for implementing and
achieving Quality in organizations and companies. So,
at this point of time we are missing evidence of suc-
cessful implementation of Quality 4.0. but there are
several companies in Israel, like Iscar, Hamlet,
RAFAEL and Kornit, which are already implementing
successfully parts of this framework.
Iscar (www.iscar.com) specializes in metal cutting
tools. They reached world class quality and productiv-
ity. The impact of their innovation processes led to
60% of all sales coming from products introduced
within the past five years.
Ham-Let (www.ham-let.com) was established in
1950 and is a global supplier of top-quality instrumen-
tation valves and fittings.
RAFAEL (www.rafael.co.il) is a state of the art
company which has pioneered, for over 70 years,
advances in defense, cyber and security solutions for
air, land, sea, and space.
Kornit (www.kornit.com) is a world leader which
develops, manufactures and markets industrial digital
printing technologies for the garment, apparel and
textile industries.
All, we believe, these companies have embraced
Quality 4.0 elements from the above bullet list.
12 A. ZONNENSHAIN AND R. S. KENETT
Moreover, the international company Nikon announced
that the strategy of Nikon is going to be on Quality 4.0,
where digital, automated and connected inspection ena-
bles complete process control from design to manufac-
ture (Nakayama 2018). This demonstrates how Nikon
metrology supplies Industry 4.0-enabled QC systems to
the automotive industries in Europe, Asia and the US.
The future strategy of Nikon is focused on non-contact
total solutions for Quality 4.0.
This position paper maps part of the current needs
of industry that can be addressed by quality methods
and tools. The impact of such initiatives is affecting
research, education, certification and hands on activities.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge the contribution of
two anonymous reviewers who provide incisive and con-
structive comments that helped improve the paper.
About the authors
Avigdor Zonnenshain is currently the Senior Research
Fellow at The Gordon Center for Systems Engineering and
at the Neaman Institute for National Policies Research at
the Technion, Haifa, Israel. He has a PhD in Systems
Engineering from the University of Arizona, Tucson, USA.
Formerly, He held several major positions in the quality,
reliability and systems engineering areas in RAFAEL & in
the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office. He is an active member
of the Israel Society for Quality (ISQ). He was also the
Chairman of the Standardization Committee for
Management & Quality in the Standardization Institute of
Israel. He is a Senior Adjunct Lecturer at the Technion,
Israel Institute of Technology, was a member of the Board
of Directors of the University of Haifa and is an active
member of INCOSE & INCOSE_IL (past president). He is a
Fellow of INCOSE.
Ron S. Kenett is Chairman of the KPA Group and
Senior Research Fellow, Samuel Neaman Institute for
National Policy Research, Technion, Israel. Ron was
awarded the Royal Statistical Society 2013 Greenfield Medal
and the 2018 European Network for Business and Industrial
Statistics Box Medal for excellence in the development and
application of statistical methods. He has authored and
coauthored 14 books over 250 publications in international
journals. His extensive consulting experience includes
engagements with organizations such as Amdocs, Nice, HP,
Intel, Israel Aircraft Industries, RAFAEL, Teva, Perrigo,
Unilever and ECI Telecom. He founded the point and click
translator company, Babylon.com and is member of the
board of several startup companies. Ron holds a BSc in
Mathematics (with first class honors) from Imperial
College, London University and a PhD in Mathematics
from the Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel.
ORCID
Avigdor Zonnenshain http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0522-1040
Ron S. Kenett http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2315-0477
References
Acharjya, D. P.; Geetha, M. K., eds. 2017. Internet of things:
Novel advances and envisioned applications. Springer.
Ayele, A.,. O. Gur, and A. Rosen. 2013. Conceptual multi-
disciplinary design optimization (MDO) of solar powered
UAV. Paper presented at the 53rd Israel Annual
Conference on Aerospace Sciences (IACAS 2013), Tel-
Aviv/Haifa, Israel.
Bentolila, D. J., A. Zonnenshain, C. Scher, and A. Rodogovski.
2019. Promoting industry in the periphery by improving
quality and excellence in management: The program for
quality and excellence in industry in Northern Israel.
Proceedings of the 37th Israeli Society for Quality
Conference, November 26–29, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Box, G., W. Hunter, and S. Hunter. 2006. Statistics for
experimenters: an introduction to design. In Data ana-
lysis, and model building (2nd ed). New York: Wiley.
Chandler, A. 1993. The visible hand: the managerial revolu-
tion in American business. Cambridge, MA: Belknap
Press.
Davis, S. 1997. Future perfect. Basic Books.
Deming, W. E. 1982. Quality, productivity and the competi-
tive position. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Center for Advanced Engineering Study.
Deming, W. E. 1986. Out of the crisis. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press.
Dorsselaer, V. N., T. Legaud, V. Lapoujade, and B. Richard.
2019. IRIS 3 Program: Study of the vibrations induced by
a missile impact on a reinforced concrete structure. Paper
presented at the 12th European LS-Dyna Conference,
Koblenz, Germany.
Fisher, R. A. 1935. The design of experiments. Edinburgh:
Oliver and Boyd.
Freeman, L., and G. Vining. 2010. Reliability data analysis
for life test experiments with subsampling. Journal of
Quality Technology 42 (3):233–41. doi:10.1080/00224065.
2010.11917821.
Godfrey, A. B. 1986. The History and Evolution of Quality
in AT&T. At&T Technical Journal 65:9–20.
Godfrey, B., and R. S. Kenett. 2007. Joseph M. Juran, a per-
spective on past contributions and future impact. Quality
and Reliability Engineering International 23 (6):653–63.
doi:10.1002/qre.861.
Hahn, G. 2003. The embedded statistician. Youden
address. http://rube.asq.org/statistics/design-ofexperiments/
the-embedded-statistician.pdf.
Halabi, A., R. S. Kenett, and L. Sacerdote. 2017. Using
dynamic Bayesian networks to model technical risk man-
agement efficiency. Quality and Reliability Engineering
International 33 (6):1179–96. doi:10.1002/qre.2186.
Halabi, A., R. S. Kenett, and L. Sacerdote. 2018. Modeling
the relationship between reliability assessment and risk
predictors using bayesian networks and a multiple logistic
regression model. Quality Engineering 30 (4):663–75. doi:
10.1080/08982112.2017.1368556.
IDC2018. www.idc.com,

Juran, J. M. 1986. The quality trilogy: A universal approach
to managing for quality. Proceedings of the ASQC 40th
Annual Quality Congress in Anaheim, California.
Juran, J. M. 1995. A history of managing for quality.
Milwaukee, WI: ASQ Press.
Kenett, R. S., and G. Shmueli. 2016. Information quality:
The potential of data and analytics to generate knowledge.
Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons.
Kenett, R. S., and S. Zacks. 2014. Modern industrial statis-
tics: With applications in R, MINITAB and JMP.
Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons.
Kenett, R. S., F. Faltin, and F. Ruggeri. 2018. Analytic meth-
ods in systems and software testing. John Wiley and Sons.
Kenett, R. S., and T. Redman. 2019. The real work of data
science: Turning data into information, better decisions,
and stronger organizations. Chichester, UK: John Wiley
and Sons.
Kenett, R. S., A. Zonnenshain, and G. Fortuna. 2018. A
road map for applied data sciences supporting sustain-
ability in advanced manufacturing: The information
Quality dimensions. Procedia Manufacturing 21:141–8.
doi:10.1016/j.promfg.2018.02.104.
Kenett, R. S., R. Swarz, and A. Zonnenshain. 2020. Systems
engineering in the fourth industrial revolution: Big data,
novel technologies, and modern systems engineering.
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
Krubasik, S., V. Dirlea, R. Kidambi, and C. Sachsenedr. 2015.
Quality 4.0: Preventive, Holistic, Future-Proof, ATKearney,
https://www.atkearney.com/industrial-goods-services/article/
?/a/Quality-4-0-preventive-holistic-future-proof
Meeker, W., and Y. Hong. 2014. Reliability Meets Big Data:
Opportunities and Challenges. Quality Engineering 26 (1):
102–16. doi:10.1080/08982112.2014.846119.
Miron-Spector, E., M. Erez, and E. Naveh. 2011. The Effect
of Conformist and Attentive-To-Detail Members on
Team Innovation: Reconciling the Innovation Paradox.
Academy of Management Journal 54 (4):740–60. doi:10.
5465/amj.2011.64870100.
Nakayama, T. 2018. Nikon opens up about its strategic
focus on quality 4.0. https://blog.nikonmetrology.com/
nikon-strategic-focus-quality-4-0/
QUALITY ENGINEERING 13
Naveh, E. 2007. Formality and discretion in successful R&D
projects. Journal of Operations Management 25:110–25.
Reinman, G., T. Ayer, T. Davan, M. Devore, S. Finley, J.
Glanovsky, L. Gray, B. Hall, C. Jones, A. Learned, et al.
2012. Design for variation. Quality Engineering 24 (2):
317–45. doi:10.1080/08982112.2012.651973.
Reis, M., and R. S. Kenett. 2017. A structured overview on
the use of computational simulators for teaching statis-
tical methods. Quality Engineering 29 (4):730–44. doi:10.
1080/08982112.2016.1272122.
Reis, M., and R. S. Kenett. 2018. Assessing the value of
information of data-centric activities in the chemical
processing industry 4.0, AIcHe. Aiche Journal 64 (11):
3868–81. doi:10.1002/aic.16203.
Reis, M. S., and G. Gins. 2017. Industrial process monitoring in
the big data/industry 4.0 era: From detection, to diagnosis, to
prognosis. Processes 5 (4):35–16. doi:10.3390/pr5030035.
Shewhart, W. A. 1926. Quality control charts. Bell System
Technical Journal 5 (4):593–602. doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.
1926.tb00106.x.
Singpurwalla, N. D., V. Volovoi, M. Brown, E. A. Pek€oz,
S. M. Ross, and W. Q. Meeker. 2019. Is reliability a new
science? A paper from the panel session held at the 10th
International Conference on Mathematical Methods in
Reliability. Applied Stochastic Models in Business and
Industry 35 (2):260–9. doi:10.1002/asmb.2442.
Sorqvist, L. 2014. Future development of the quality profes-
sion, ICQ’14. Tokyo, Japan.
Taguchi, G. 1987. Systems of experimental design, ed. D.
Clausing, vols. 1–2. New York: UNIPUB/Kraus
International Publications.
Tukey, J. W. 1962. The future of data analysis. The Annals
of Mathematical Statistics, 33 (1):1–67. doi:10.1214/aoms/
1177704711.
Zairi, M. 2017. Deep in crisis: The uncertain future of the
quality profession (Quality 4.0). UK: European Centre for
Best Practice Management Publishing House.
Zio, E. 2016. Some challenges and opportunities in reliabil-
ity engineering. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 65 (4):
1769–82. doi:10.1109/TR.2016.2591504.