Skip to main content
Advantive

Use Acceptance Sampling to Improve Manufacturing Process and Product Quality

By Grace Barton Updated
Use Acceptance Sampling to Improve Manufacturing Process and Product Quality

How do manufacturing organizations confirm that supplier products comply with critical quality standards? For the most part, manufacturers rely on inspectors to check incoming materials. Those results are compared with the company’s own quality standards and supplier-generated documents such as Certificates of Analysis (COAs). Based on results, inspectors either accept or reject a shipment.
 
However, most of us can recite the 3rd of Dr. W. Edwards
Deming’s 14 management principles, which exhorts organizations to “cease dependence on inspection to achieve quality.” Organizations that take Deming’s guidance to heart may wonder if it’s better to skip inspection at intake.
 
Personally, I believe it’s better to expend resources on inspection of critical received goods. By not inspecting, companies are basically crossing their corporate fingers and hoping that products meet requirements.
 

Apply Statistical Sampling to Minimize Risk and Maximize Quality

But in many cases, checking 100% of incoming materials isn’t realistic. Lot Acceptance Sampling (or just Acceptance Sampling) applies statistical sampling to enable inspectors to decide whether to accept or reject materials.
 
Organizations typically use Acceptance Sampling procedures as defined by the MIL-STD-1916 (DoD Preferred Methods for Acceptance of Product) or ANSI/ASQ Z1.4 or Z1.9. Regardless of the method, Acceptance Sampling helps minimize inspection costs, manage risk, and prevent off-quality product from entering the production process.
 

Turn Acceptance Sampling into a Quality Improvement Tool

Acceptance Sampling occupies the middle ground between no inspection and 100% inspection. The result is that these techniques have been derided as just another set of inspection tools. Plus, most quality professionals consider Acceptance Sampling unworthy of being called a quality-improvement tool because the end result of all those statistical gyrations is a meek, stand-alone “Accept” or “Reject” conclusion.
 
Long ago, I agreed with these assertions, but no more. Instead, I believe Acceptance Sampling can be used as a highly effective means of improving quality.
 
Here’s how: Imagine inspectors use Acceptance Sampling to check incoming product. But assume inspectors save the data that has been used for making the Accept/Reject conclusion.
 
For example, when performing attribute checks using ANSI/ASQ Z1.4, the actual defect codes and reasons for failure might be noted along with the supplier name, product code, lot number, and other important traceability fields. Likewise, when using ANSI/ASQ Z1.9 for variables data, the actual measurements (and traceability elements associated with the shipment) are saved to a database. By capturing this valuable data, inspectors would not just make an Accept/Reject decision, but create an Acceptance Sampling plan that would allow data that lead up to the conclusion to be saved to a database.

Learn more about the advantages of centralizing statistical and quality management data.

Benefits of Collecting Quality Inspection Data

Imagine what you can do when you have those data available for reference all in one place. Now you have a database in which historical data are available by supplier, product, and other traceability elements. The Acceptance Sampling plans themselves become the source for these quality data. Now—
 

  • Control charts, histograms, Pareto charts, and other statistical analyses can be used to analyze receiving-inspection data.
  • Defect levels between suppliers can be compared.
  • Significant time-based changes in PPM defect rates can be identified.
  • The control (or lack of control) of a supplier’s processes can be confirmed.
  • The data can be used to collaboratively work with suppliers to help them improve the quality of their supplied products and their manufacturing processes.

 
In essence, saving the measurement data along with the Accept/Reject conclusion allows Acceptance Sampling procedures to be a tremendous complement to typical quality improvement efforts.
 
Previously unknown vendor-specific quality levels can be accurately quantified and that information can be used for significantly improving vendor quality and reducing quality costs across the supply chain.
 
And it can all be done simply with little or no cost to those who already use ANSI/ASQ procedures. All it takes is a change in mindset. We must think differently about Acceptance Sampling.

Grace Barton

Marketing Specialist

About the Author Latest Posts

Grace Barton is a digital marketing and competitive intelligence professional who crafts strategic narratives by bridging marketing insights with analytical expertise. At Advantive, she creates engaging, data-driven content tailored to the distribution, manufacturing, packaging, and quality industries. Her goal is to deliver impactful messaging that drives engagement and growth based on specific gap closure needs, whether responding to sales organization requirements, pinpointing gaps in content, or meeting immediate market trends.
She thrives on transforming competitive intelligence into actionable insights for the sales organization. Grace manages Advantive’s competitive intelligence platform, Klue, to equip the sales team with the battlecards and market data they need to stay ahead of competitors. Since launch, she’s built 28+ battlecards across four lines of business, ensuring the GTM strategy stays sharp.
Grace has a passion for leveraging market insights with storytelling to guide strategic decision-making, empower sales organizations, and nurture organizational growth.

Areas of Expertise: Digital Marketing, Competitive Intelligence, Strategic Narratives, Marketing Insights, Analytical Expertise

LinkedIn

Editorial standards

Fact-checking & editorial guidelines

Every article on advantive.com is written and reviewed against an internal accuracy standard before publication. Here's what that means in practice.

  • Product claims are verified by the brand team that owns the platform.

    When an article references InfinityQS, WinSPC, PQ Systems, Pinpoint, ParityFactory, ProPlanner, KiwiPlan, DDI System, VeraCore, or any of Advantive's other specialty platforms, the relevant product team checks technical statements about features, deployment, and current capability before the article goes live.

  • External statistics cite their source inline.

    When an article references industry survey results, regulatory benchmarks, or third-party research, the source is linked at the point of citation. Statements without an inline source link are first-party observations drawn from Advantive's product teams or customer base.

  • Publication and revision dates stay visible.

    The original publication date and the most recent revision date are both shown on every article. Topics that change quickly — AI capabilities, regulatory rules, product roadmaps — are revisited on a tighter cadence than evergreen reference content.

  • Corrections are issued openly.

    If a factual error is reported, the article is updated, the revision date advances, and material corrections are noted at the bottom of the article so readers can see what changed and when.

Found something wrong, or have a citation to add? Get in touch with the editorial team and we'll review it.

Subject-matter review

Reviewed by subject-matter experts

Advantive is a portfolio of 14+ specialty software platforms — each one built and maintained by a product team that has spent years inside a specific manufacturing or distribution discipline. Articles in technical channels are reviewed by the relevant team before publication.

  • Quality & SPC content

    Reviewed by the InfinityQS, WinSPC, and PQ Systems product teams — the platforms behind statistical process control, capability analysis, and gage management deployments across food, automotive, pharma, and CPG manufacturers.

  • Manufacturing operations & MES content

    Reviewed by the PINpoint, ProPlanner, ParityFactory, and VIA Information Tools teams, whose platforms run production scheduling, traceability, and shop-floor execution for discrete, automotive, and food-and-beverage manufacturers.

  • Packaging & converter content

    Reviewed by the KiwiPlan, Abaca, and AdvantZware teams, who build software specifically for corrugated, folding-carton, and packaging-converter operations.

  • Distribution, ERP & B2B commerce content

    Reviewed by the DDI System (inFORM ERP), Distribution One, VeraCore, Pepperi, and Commerce Vision teams, whose platforms run wholesale ERP, fulfillment, field sales, and B2B portals for specialty distributors and 3PLs.

Are you a practitioner with domain expertise to contribute? Get in touch — we accept guest contributions from operators in the industries we serve.