Recent problems of quality management have gained a diverse character. A number of organizations at different levels actively seek for implementing various quality management systems. A part of those are based on ISO standards, whereas the rest employs other measures. Despite these variations, the actions taken must be properly performed thus avoiding situations when the issued certificate only plays a crucial role. The key objective is to ensure continuous improvement and personal competitive advantage of activities stimulated by an organization. The writing does not focus on all above introduced questions. The only point is that frequently the implementation of quality management systems is really a rather formal and superficial process, i.e. certain call of fashion, discussing the fields of social affairs, education and culture in particular.
We can hardly expect a full answer to the provided question. A growth in pessimism and disbelief in the quality management system as the one providing real benefits to the organization have evolved into a matter of concern. Understanding a quality management system as a bureaucratic arrangement the real output of which is only a requirement for an issuing a certificate has emerged as risk to quality management systems in general. Contradictions at a methodological level have been also increasing. For instance, though plenty of quality management systems have been implemented, however, the experts in the field of quality fail to agree on the aims of quality and the way they should be applied to one or another organization. The explained situation requires in-depth discussions at all levels and investigations into the questions about the quality of rapidly increasing information on the basis of which management practises have been created and developed. After all, according to Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord (1754–1838), ‘those who own information – rule the world’.