Quality Objectives for Laboratories: Are Yours Driving Improvement or Just Satisfying Auditors?

Most laboratories have quality objectives. After all, it’s a requirement of ISO/IEC 17025, ISO/IEC 17020 and ISO 15189.

Many also have a document somewhere that is reviewed once a year, reported to management, and then largely forgotten until the next review.

The problem is not that laboratories lack quality objectives. The problem is that many objectives add little value to the operation of the laboratory. You do it because you’re forced to and not because you want to. It’s a chore rather than an opportunity for inspiration and creativity. Let that sink in for a moment.

The intention in the Standards is sound. Objectives provide direction, support continual improvement, and help ensure the management system contributes to organisational success. It’s like setting your destination for a future holiday – a place to be, but without all the minute details to bog you down.

However, not all objectives are created equal.

The Difference Between Compliance Objectives and Useful Objectives

A common mistake is creating objectives simply because the standard requires them.

Examples include:

• Complete internal audits on time.
• Conduct management reviews annually.
• Maintain accreditation.
• Close corrective actions within 30 days.

While these activities are important, they are largely management system maintenance activities. They demonstrate compliance but often provide limited insight into how effectively the laboratory is performing.

A useful quality objective should answer a simple question:

What outcome are we trying to improve for the laboratory or its customers?

When viewed through that lens, many existing objectives become little more than administrative targets.

What Makes a Good Quality Objective?

Effective quality objectives generally have several characteristics.

They are:

• Relevant to the laboratory’s strategic direction.
• Meaningful to staff and management.
• Measurable using available data.
• Capable of driving improvement.
• Reviewed frequently enough to influence decisions.

Most importantly, they focus on outcomes rather than activities.

For example:

Less useful objective

“Conduct all scheduled equipment calibrations.”

More useful objective

“Maintain equipment availability above 98%.”

The first measures whether a task was completed. The second measures whether the laboratory is achieving the outcome that matters.

 

From Good Intentions to SMART Objectives

In a previous article on planning for success, we discussed the importance of establishing objectives that support the laboratory’s strategic direction. One of the simplest ways to achieve this is through the SMART approach.

A quality objective should be:

Specific – clearly define what will be improved.

Measurable – supported by data that allows progress to be monitored.

Achievable – realistic within the laboratory’s available resources.

Relevant – aligned with customer needs, operational priorities, and business goals.

Time-bound – include a timeframe for achievement.

For example, a laboratory may state:

“Improve customer satisfaction.”

While admirable, it is difficult to determine whether the objective has been achieved.

A SMART version might be:

“Reduce customer complaints relating to report turnaround times by 20% within the next 12 months.”

The objective is now specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound.

The SMART framework does not guarantee a good objective, but it helps transform vague aspirations into meaningful targets that can be monitored, reviewed and improved.

 

Examples of Quality Objectives That Add Value

Turnaround Time Performance

Many labs monitor turnaround time, but the objective often focuses on averages.

A better approach is to focus on customer expectations.

For example:

• 95% of routine samples reported within agreed turnaround times.
• Reduce overdue reports by 25% over 12 months.

These objectives directly relate to customer experience and operational efficiency.

Quality of Reporting

Errors in reports can damage customer confidence and consume significant resources through rework.

Possible objectives include:

• Reduce report amendments by 20%.
• Maintain report review errors below 1% of issued reports.
• Reduce customer complaints relating to reporting accuracy.

Technical Competence

Many labs track training completion, but completion alone does not necessarily demonstrate competence.

Alternative objectives might include:

• Reduce analyst-related errors by 15%.
• Achieve satisfactory performance in all proficiency testing rounds.
• Complete competency reassessments within required timeframes.

These objectives focus on outcomes rather than attendance.

Customer Experience

Customer satisfaction surveys often provide limited information and suffer from poor response rates.

More meaningful objectives may include:

• Reduce customer complaints by 20%.
• Improve customer retention.
• Increase engagement through customer advisory meetings.
• Reduce response time to technical enquiries.

These measures focus on the customer’s actual experience with the laboratory.

Continuous Improvement

Improvement objectives should demonstrate learning and effectiveness.

Examples include:

• Reduce recurring nonconformances by 50%.
• Reduce corrective action closure time by 1 month without compromising investigation quality.
• Implement three improvement projects arising from risk or opportunity reviews.

These objectives help ensure the management system drives improvement rather than merely records problems.

Avoiding Common Pitfalls

We see a lot of pitfalls to entrap unsuspecting lab management people. Several issues appear regularly during assessments and audits.

Too Many Objectives

Some labs develop extensive lists of objectives and monitor dozens of metrics. That can be a fun game with fancy dashboards, which make you feel like you’re a stockbroker working at the ASX? But is that really necessary (unless you secretly want to switch from science or engineering into finance and economics)?

The result is often confusion rather than focus.

A small number of meaningful objectives is usually more effective than a large number of administrative measures. You can still monitor your administrative measures; they can tell you about operational efficiency, just as the number of customers served at McDonald’s at self-serve kiosks tells management which are the “stars” and which are the “dogs” at their store at any one time. But they aren’t Quality objectives.

Measuring What Is Easy

It is tempting to monitor whatever data is readily available. However, easy-to-measure metrics are not always important metrics.

The objective should be driven by what matters, not simply by what is convenient to count. Remember, too, that the things we choose to measure are the things we focus on, often to the detriment of other parts of the business.

Focusing Only on Compliance

If every objective relates to audits, management reviews, corrective actions and accreditation activities, the lab may be missing opportunities to improve operational performance, customer outcomes and business effectiveness.

A Simple Test

When reviewing your quality objectives, ask:

If we achieved this objective, would our laboratory genuinely be better off?

If the answer is yes, you probably have a meaningful objective.

If the answer is merely that you would satisfy an auditor, it may be worth revisiting.

Making Quality Objectives Matter

Quality objectives should not exist solely to satisfy a clause in a standard and get the tick of approval from an external auditor. Done well, they provide a practical link between the management system and the performance of the laboratory.

The most effective labs use quality objectives to drive decisions, focus improvement efforts and measure what truly matters. Because the real value of a quality objective is not that it can be reported at management review, it is that it helps the lab perform better tomorrow than it did today.