Is good quality bad?
According to the economist on the panel addressing the Senate Committee, quality is a double-edged sword that leads to less cars being bought, primarily because they simply last longer.
Is this a bad thing?
Not for consumers!
On the web, should a website be constantly updated if quality is not an issue?
Should site updates be driven by necessity or by an arbitrary schedule?
Rhetorical questions!
Updates should be relevant, driven by users to some degree, and on a schedule as defined by business need, not decided by throwing runes or looking into crystal balls!
A site does not need to make significant updates unless it increases the quality, defined (by me) as:
Value is a factor of “what’s in it for me?”, “what do I need?” and “do you have it for me?”
To have actual value a site needs to provide what visitors need and allow them to easily and painlessly get it! Note: This could be information, a product, a service a connection etc.
Satisfaction, is the ability to deliver at or above user expectations.
Competition is a factor of uniqueness.
Defect is a factor of not delivering to expectations through issues or actions that could be resolved given insight, resources or technology.
Quality is a necessity. Quality attracts customers. Quality is good for business.
Online, website quality is a necessary goal.
Now will someone please get out there and tell the Big 3 Automakers to make better quality cars that people want and let a willing audience come to them! (And let me keep my tax dollars!)
