Abstract:Background: Over the last century, the invitation to improve health-care service quality has taken many different forms: questions, observations, methods, tools and actions have emerged and evolved to create relevant 'improvement work.' In this paper we present three phases of this work. The basic frameworks used in these phases have not supplanted each other, but they have been layered one upon the next over time. Each brought important new thinking, new change opportunities and a new set of limits. The important messages of each need to be carried together into the future, as must the sense of curiosity and possibility about the commonalities that has driven this evolution. Methods: Literature, personal experience and other artifacts were reviewed to develop this description of how the focus on quality work has evolved (and continues to evolve) over the last century. Results: We describe three phases. Quality 1.0 seeks to answer the question 'How might we establish thresholds for good healthcare services?' It described certain 'basic' standards that should be used to certify acceptable performance and capability. This led to the formation of formal processes for review, documentation and external audits and a system for public notice and recognition. Over time, the limits and risks of this approach also became more visible: a 'micro-accounting compliance' sometimes triumphed over what might be of even greater strategic importance in the development and operations of effective systems of disease prevention and management to improve outcomes for patients and families. Quality 2.0 asked 'How might we use enterprise-wide systems for disease management?' It added a focus on the processes and systems of production, reduction of unwanted variation, the intrinsic motivation to take pride in work, outcome measurement and collaborative work practices as ways to improve quality, modeled on experiences in other industries. Quality 3.0 asks 'How might we improve the value of the contribution that healthcare service makes to health?' It requires careful consideration of the meaning of 'service' and 'value', service-creating logic, and prompts us to consider both relationships and activities in the context of the coproduction of health-care services. Conclusion: Efforts to improve the quality and value of health-care services have evolved over the last century. With each success have come new challenges and questions, requiring the addition of new frames and approaches.

New Directions In Quality Management

Quality Design for Maritime Studies Programme in the Digital Era

New Directions for Quality Assurance: Transparent Outcomes for Industry Collaboration, Research Training and Student Success

Tools for Effective Student Feedback

Evolution and future of total quality management: management control and organisational learning

The quality movement in higher education in the United States

From assurance to coproduction: a century of improving the quality of health-care service

Quality 2030: quality management for the future

Building Quality Foundations: Indicators and Instruments to Measure the Quality of Vocational Education and Training

Quality 4.0—the challenging future of quality engineering

Threshold quality parameters in hybrid higher education

Quality Improvement in Research and Development: A Study

Managing survey engagement to improve quality assurance

Frontier Quality Differentials In Hybrid Higher Education

Trends in Higher Education Quality Management in China

The Datafication of Higher Education : Evaluating tests that measure learning outcomes

Improving Institutional Operations

Innovation, professionalisation and evaluation: implications for quality management in higher education

A bibliometric analysis of Quality 4.0: current status, trends and future research directions

Quality 4.0: Learning quality control, the evolution of SQC/SPC