Key takeaways
Short answer: Internal and external failure costs are the two cost-of-quality categories that count the price of defects — the cost of nonconformance, as opposed to the prevention and appraisal you spend to achieve quality. Internal failure costs arise from defects caught before the product ships: scrap, rework, re-inspection. External failure costs arise from defects that escape to the customer: returns, warranty claims, recalls, lost reputation. The crucial fact is that external failures cost far more than internal ones — catching a defect inside is dramatically cheaper than letting it escape. For the spending that prevents both, see prevention vs appraisal costs.
Internal failure costs are the costs of defects that are found before the product reaches the customer — caught inside the operation, during production or inspection. They include scrap (defective units thrown away), rework (the cost of fixing units that failed), re-inspection and retesting of reworked items, downgrading (selling a defective unit as a lower-grade product), and the lost capacity consumed making units that turned out bad. The defining feature is that the defect was contained internally — it did not escape to the customer — so the cost, while real, is limited to the internal consequences. Internal failure costs are a bad quality cost: they are the price of having made defects, not money spent to prevent or detect them. But because the defect was caught inside, internal failure is the far cheaper of the two failure categories — a defect found before it ships costs a fraction of one that gets out.
External failure costs are the costs of defects that escape to the customer — discovered only after the product has shipped. They include returns and replacements, warranty claims, repairs in the field, recalls, customer complaints handling, liability, and the often-enormous but hard-to-quantify cost of lost reputation and lost future business. The defining feature is that the defect reached the customer, which multiplies its cost dramatically: a defect that would have cost a little to scrap internally now triggers shipping both ways, field service, warranty administration, and damaged trust. External failure costs are the most expensive category in the cost of quality, often by a wide margin, precisely because the consequences compound once a defect is in the customer's hands. The reputational damage alone can dwarf all the direct costs, and unlike internal failures, external ones erode the customer relationship the business depends on.
The clean distinction is where the defect was found: internal failure costs come from defects caught inside, external from defects that escaped to the customer. Both are costs of nonconformance — the price of defects — but they differ enormously in magnitude. The principle, sometimes called the rule of escalating cost, is that the cost of a defect multiplies the further it travels before being caught: cheapest to catch at the source, more expensive at internal inspection, far more expensive once it reaches the customer, and most expensive of all in the field or a recall. A defect caught internally is contained; one that escapes detonates. This is why the gap between internal and external failure costs is so large, and why catching defects before they ship — or better, preventing them — is so valuable. The same defect costs wildly different amounts depending only on how far it got.
Consider the same defective component caught at two different points. Caught internally, on the line or at final inspection: it is scrapped or reworked — a modest cost in material, labour, and lost capacity, fully contained inside the plant. Now suppose that same defect escapes and ships to the customer. It fails in the customer's product, triggering a warranty claim: the company pays return shipping both ways, field diagnosis, a replacement unit, warranty administration, and the customer's frustration — and if the defect is widespread, a recall, with its enormous direct and reputational costs. The internal version cost a little; the external version cost many times more, plus damage to the relationship and brand that may cost future sales. Identical defect, vastly different cost, determined entirely by whether it was caught inside or escaped. This is the escalating cost of a defect made vivid.
Internal and external failure costs, together with prevention and appraisal, make up the four categories of the cost of quality, and failure costs — especially external — are usually the largest and the reason quality investment pays off. The logic of cost-of-quality management is that spending on prevention and appraisal is justified by the failure costs it avoids, and external failure costs are so high that even substantial prevention investment is easily repaid by escapes prevented. The hierarchy of value is clear: best of all, prevent the defect (no failure cost at all); failing that, catch it internally (cheap internal failure) rather than let it escape (expensive external failure); worst of all, let it reach the customer. This is why quality programs prioritize prevention first and internal detection second, and treat external failures as the costly outcomes to be avoided at almost any reasonable prevention cost. Minimizing failure cost, dominated by the external category, is the financial engine behind quality investment.
Internal failure costs connect directly to the quality factor of OEE: the scrap and rework that make up internal failure are exactly the yield and scrap losses that lower the quality factor, and the capacity they consume also hits availability and performance. So a poor OEE quality factor is, in financial terms, internal failure cost. External failure costs sit downstream of OEE — they are the defects that the quality factor's detection failed to catch and that escaped — but they share the same root cause: defects made in the first place. Improving OEE's quality factor by stopping defects at the source (the prevention approach) reduces both internal failure cost (less scrap and rework) and external failure cost (fewer escapes). The OEE quality factor and the failure-cost categories are two views of the same defects.
Fabrico quantifies the internal failure that shows up as lost OEE — the scrap and rework that the quality factor measures — and ties it to the specific defects and reasons causing it. That makes the internal failure cost visible and points to where prevention would eliminate the defect at its source, reducing both the internal failure cost on the floor and the external failure cost of escapes. Seeing which defects cost the most in lost OEE is the starting point for cutting failure costs across the board. Book a demo to see your internal failure cost in live OEE.
Internal failure costs come from defects caught before the product ships — scrap, rework, re-inspection. External failure costs come from defects that escape to the customer — returns, warranty, recalls, lost reputation. External failures cost far more, because the defect reached the customer.
Because a defect that escapes to the customer triggers far more costs — return shipping, field service, warranty, possible recall — plus hard-to-quantify reputational damage and lost future business. A defect caught internally is contained to scrap or rework, a fraction of the cost.
Scrap (defective units discarded), rework (fixing failed units), re-inspection and retesting of reworked items, downgrading, and the lost capacity consumed making units that turned out defective — all costs of defects caught before shipping.
Returns and replacements, warranty claims, field repairs, recalls, complaint handling, liability, and lost reputation and future business — all costs of defects that reached the customer before being caught.
Internal failure costs are the scrap and rework that lower the OEE quality factor and consume capacity. External failure costs are the defects that escaped the quality factor's detection. Improving quality at the source reduces both, since they share the same root cause — defects made.
Zaloguj
Blog
