Understanding Quality Control and Defects in Golf Production

Golf’s original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) spend millions of dollars every year on assuring quality control specifications are maintained on every product produced. Recently, these QC processes have fallen under question as defective products — whether it be golf balls with off-center cores or non-conforming drivers — have made their way to customers.

While defects in manufacturing are nothing new, and arguably far fewer today than equipment yields of decades past, social media and internet outrage have companies under a microscope.

Understanding Defects

First and foremost, it's important to understand that every single process that produces a product or service can also produce defective products. It is also extraordinarily rare for a manufacturing process to yield zero defects. This may seem like common sense, but it's not. Trust me.

Golf balls are a great example of this concept for two reasons:

1. They are one of the most frequently produced products in golf; and

2. They are produced in large lots (i.e., "mass production.")

Because of these two facts, golf balls are at a high risk of defects. Throw in the third fact that they have many parts in their construction, including multiple layered cores, and the opportunities for failure increase substantially.

Taking A Step Back

Larger OEMs with significant golf ball market share can produce as many as 5 million dozen golf balls a year. That means there are 5 million opportunities (at least) for the finished product to be defective. Think about all of the manpower, machinery, R&D and money that goes into designing the process used to create a golf ball. Despite all of that attention and effort -- and sometimes because of it -- defects can still slip through.

The question a company has to ask itself is simple, but not easily answered: "How many defects are we comfortable with?"

As golfers, we hope the answer to that question is "None!" But guess what? It's not.

Instead, companies have a judgement call to make: is the effort/time/money to reach ZERO defects worth it, or are we willing to accept a percent yield of golf balls that fall out of spec? Every quality control department in every industry asks themselves this question every single day.

How they answer it depends on a few factors:

1. What is the worst case scenario if a consumer receives a defective product? (Depending on industry, this can range from nothing to permanent customer loss)

2. What is the return on investment (ROI) for allocating the resources necessary to lower our defective yield? Or, will customers ACTUALLY buy more of our product because of these behind-the-scenes efforts? (Will they notice?)

3. What are our competitors doing?

4. Did their customers notice?

The severity and likelihood of occurrence of a defect reaching the customer differs from one industry to the next. In golf, any high-profile player stumbling upon a defective piece of equipment would be of the highest severity. Luckily, the likelihood of that occurring is quite rare (or so we hope).

It is theorized that reaching ‘zero defects’ is next to impossible in the golf equipment space. Above all else is the need to detect when a defect slips through the cracks, if not prevented entirely. A process doesn’t need to be perfect in order to prevent defects from reaching the customer, and it’s up to us to understand that mistakes happen despite best intentions.

Do Golf Companies Really Want You to Improve?

Whether it be a new driver release, the introduction of a new set of irons, or a flashy new golf ball that dances on the green, all new golf equipment comes packaged with the promise to lower your scores and improve your game. But does this promise actually work against what golf companies really want from their customers?

Consider this

A new golf product is released by a well-known original equipment manufacturer (OEM) that promises to "revolutionize the game as we know it." This new piece of equipment, while expensive, undoubtedly allows golfers to shoot lower scores no matter what. Anyone who buys the product and uses it regularly experiences an immediate benefit, no exceptions. In other words, this product successfully delivers what the company promises 100 percent of the time.

Why in the world would that golf OEM want you to purchase that product? I propose it would be detrimental to that company for you to do so.

If I were the golfer in the above example, I would be so impressed with the amazing product that I wouldn't even think about buying any competitor's products. Why would I need to? I've already seen the benefits of committing to this "revolutionary product," and that's good enough for me and my crappy golf game. Further, I will probably look the other way when the same company releases Awesome Product 2.0 a year later. I don't need it. My pain has already been relieved.

But that's not how the real world works, right?

As with any retail company, products are released with an understanding that the "next big thing" is right around the corner. This is especially true with golf equipment. Company A wants you to buy their new driver that promises 20 more yards off the tee, but they also want you to buy next year's model that promises 22 more yards. Hell, they'll even throw in a few interchangeable weights on the club to make you drool more.

But why would I want to drop $500 on the possibility of two more yards? I wouldn't, and golf companies know that.

Golf OEMs aren't selling me on the fact that I can hit a drive 20-yards further with their new product, because they have no way of promising that I'll be able to get those results. Instead, they are selling me on the chance that I'll get those results.

Every time I purchase a piece of golf equipment that actually improves my game, I also stop looking for other pieces of equipment for the same purpose. Even if that equipment is from the same company.

So, do golf companies really want you to improve?

I propose that they do not. If they did -- truly wanted you to get better -- then why would you ever need to buy another piece of equipment later?

Police officers don't want crime to end just as hospitals don't want all illness to be eradicated. As soon as either of those two outcomes occurs, businesses shut down soon after.

I breached this subject last week on Twitter when I asked my followers whether or not they believed golf equipment companies really want their customers to get better at the game. The replies I received were mixed, however nearly every response ultimately focused on brand loyalty in some manner.

So what is "brand loyalty?" A common definition suggests that brand loyalty is "the tendency of some consumers to continue buying the same brand of goods rather than competing brands." It is an outcome every company wants their customer base to embrace. However, at what point does this blind dedication to a brand actually devalue the brand's products?

Stay tuned for my next post along those lines.

8 Wastes in the Golf Equipment Industry

The current state of the golf equipment manufacturing industry is a wasteland. As companies turn out more and more clubs into the marketplace, customers are hard-pressed to keep up with all of this 'innovation' and 'performance' flashing across their TV screens, golf magazines and laptop monitors. Sorry friends, but the golf equipment industry needs an enema.

Not entirely unlike the 'Seven Deadly Sins', there are 8 wastes found in industries across the globe: Transport, Inventory, Motion, Waiting, Over-production, Over-processing, Defects (Rework), and Skills (Human Intellect). Eliminating or reducing these wastes from the golf equipment industry would not only streamline processes and increase customer satisfaction, but it could very well save the industry itself.

Here are eight examples of each type of waste within the golf equipment industry as I see it.

Transport

Whenever you have an excessive amount of people, products or information moving around a process, you are dealing with waste. Think about all of the different places you can purchase a golf club. You've got brick & mortar major sporting dealers (Dick's, Sports Authority, etc.), golf-specific stores (Golf Galaxy, Golfsmith), second-hand sporting good shops, and this little thing called the Internet. The omni-channel model of combining multiple retail sources just compounds the issue.

If OEMs want to help solve the way their industry is perceived, they need to first limit the places their products are moving, not increase them. I know that sounds counter-intuitive, but less is more in this case.

Inventory

This should be obvious. Anyone who has taken five minutes of an Economics class knows the concept of supply and demand. If you carry more inventory than what your customers need, you run the risk of your products expiring or cannibalizing themselves. That's waste in a nutshell, really.

All of those drivers and iron sets you see "priced to sell" that were once at full price only 4 months ago? That's excessive inventory, which costs money to store, and even more money to throw away. (See: Dick's Sporting Goods laying off all of their PGA pros.)

Motion

Similar to Transport, the waste of motion deals specifically with excessive moving parts within a process or task. Think about all the steps you -- personally -- have to go through in order to buy a new golf club. First you have to learn about the new product. Next, you have to find the product's price. Then you probably want to test it out at a store. You might need to also get fit for the club. If it's an adjustable driver, you'll also want to tinker with the loft, swing-weight and whatever else. All of that excessive motion needs to be done before you even buy the damn thing.

Want to cut down on all of that motion? Simplify golf club technology and increase accessibility of product testing. A one-stop shop is ideal.

Waiting

Any time you have to wait for something to occur before another step can take place in a process, waste is growing. Admittedly, OEMs have done a pretty decent job with cutting down how long you have to wait before you get their product in your hands. There's always room for improvement, however.

The waste of Waiting can also be delayed (pun intended). Whenever a new golf club is announced by your favorite brand, you may be tempted to "wait" for prices to drop on "older" equipment. Every day that goes by before prices drop is a day where you -- the customer -- keep your wallet shut. Want to decrease excessive inventory while increasing sales? Lower prices a full month before the next product is announced.

Over-Production and Over-Processing

I'm grouping these two wastes together because they are very similar in most industries. Similar to Inventory, supply and demand dictates how bad these wastes can be for a product. A good analogy for Over-production is to compare McDonald's against a high-end restaurant. Mickey-D's makes a ton of hamburgers every morning in preparation for that day's customer volume (even though they really don't know how many people will walk through the door). At the end of the day, any burgers that aren't purchased get thrown away. Conversely, most restaurants are "made-to-order" and only make food at the time of order. Sound similar to golf clubs being pushed down your throat?

Over-processing is similar such that high-grade materials and features are being used when less fancy items would do just fine. I guarantee you that amateur golfers cannot tell the difference between a standard driver and an adjustable driver. Why do we need to move weights around and change our driver's center-of-gravity? Seems pretty wasteful to me. And expensive.

Defects (Rework)

This is, in my opinion, one of the biggest wastes currently seen in the equipment industry. While golf clubs might not be defective in the truest sense of the word, there is a TON of rework that occurs every single time a new club is released.

Be honest with yourself: is there really that big a difference between the TaylorMade SLDR and TaylorMade JetSpeed? Sure, there are a few different moving parts here and there, but such small details are hardly reason enough to shell out another $400. The same can be said for almost every new iron, wedge, putter or wood that comes off the assembly line. Increase the time between product releases to allow for true innovation to breathe.

Skills (Human Intellect)

Last but certainly not least is the waste of Skills, also commonly known as the waste of Human Intellect. The concept of Hack Golf and crowdsourcing was started to combat this waste, which describes any time you aren't tapping into your people's (or customer's) knowledge base.

Golf OEMs are comprised of some very, very intelligent people. I've met many of them. I enjoy speaking to all of them. And, more often than not, all of them also play golf. It would be foolish for the golf equipment industry to ignore the pain points golfers feel when purchasing new clubs, and I suspect they are finally getting the message.