• Home
• ASQ Exams
• CQE - Certified Quality Engineer

CQE ASQ Practice Test Questions and Exam Dumps

Question 1

What are the main drawbacks of forming an improvement team that is too large in size?

A. I only
B. I and II only
C. I, II and III only
D. I, II, III and IV

Correct answer: C

Explanation:
When forming a team to work on continuous improvement or quality-related initiatives, it's important to consider the size of the group. While it might seem that a larger team would bring more diverse perspectives and talents, having too many members can actually hinder the effectiveness of the group. There are several significant disadvantages associated with overly large teams.

The first point listed is the difficulty in having constructive input from the entire group. This is a common issue in large teams. As the number of members increases, the likelihood that all individuals will contribute equally decreases. Some people may feel intimidated, overshadowed, or simply uninterested in speaking up in large groups. Others may dominate the conversation, making it harder for quieter or less assertive members to participate. This uneven participation can reduce the overall value of the team discussions and result in missed ideas or perspectives.

The second disadvantage is the difficulty in arriving at consensus. Larger groups naturally bring a broader range of opinions, experiences, and interests. While diversity is valuable, it also increases the complexity of reaching agreement. Discussions may become drawn out, decisions delayed, or compromises weakened in an attempt to satisfy everyone. This can frustrate team members and slow progress, especially when quick decision-making is necessary.

The third concern is difficulty in finding large meeting facilities. While this is more of a logistical issue, it becomes relevant when teams meet in person. As team size grows, arranging suitable meeting rooms with adequate space and resources can become challenging. This logistical obstacle may hinder regular meetings or limit where and how the team can operate effectively.

The fourth point mentions difficulty for the recorder in keeping up with more paperwork. While this is a potential challenge, it is generally less significant than the first three issues. Good documentation practices, digital tools, or shared note-taking responsibilities can help overcome this. In most cases, the workload for documentation does not increase linearly with team size, and this problem can be managed more easily than the others.

Based on the severity and relevance of these disadvantages, the correct answer includes the first three statements only. The fourth point is not considered a major disadvantage compared to the others.

Thus, the best choice is the one that includes I, II, and III, which makes C the correct answer.

Question 2

Which of the following options does not fall under the category of prevention costs in a quality management system?

A. Writing operating procedures
B. Training
C. Data acquisition and analysis
D. Calibrating test equipment

Correct answer: D

Explanation:
In the context of quality management and cost of quality (CoQ), costs are generally categorized into four major groups: prevention costs, appraisal costs, internal failure costs, and external failure costs. Prevention costs are associated with activities that are carried out to prevent defects and ensure that the product or service meets quality requirements from the start. These costs are seen as investments in building quality into the process rather than detecting or correcting problems later.

Let’s look at each of the options and understand their role:

Option A, writing operating procedures, clearly falls into the category of prevention costs. Documenting procedures is part of standardizing processes to prevent variation and defects. By having clear and consistent instructions, organizations ensure that workers perform tasks correctly, minimizing the likelihood of errors or inconsistencies in production.

Option B, training, is also a classic example of a prevention cost. Training helps employees understand how to do their jobs correctly and how to follow quality procedures. This upfront investment in human resources is made specifically to prevent mistakes, misunderstandings, and poor-quality outcomes.

Option C, data acquisition and analysis, generally falls under prevention costs when it is used to monitor processes and identify potential quality issues before they happen. Collecting and analyzing data about production processes helps organizations understand trends, spot early warning signs, and make improvements proactively. This supports the goal of defect prevention rather than defect detection or correction.

Option D, calibrating test equipment, is the one that does not fall neatly under prevention costs. Instead, this activity is generally classified as an appraisal cost. Appraisal costs are those related to measuring and monitoring activities that ensure quality standards are being met. Calibration ensures that measuring instruments are accurate and reliable, which is essential for proper testing and inspection. However, it does not prevent defects from occurring in the process itself; it simply ensures that the tools used to detect those defects are functioning correctly.

In other words, calibration supports the quality control function but does not directly prevent defects in the product or service. It is a control mechanism used during or after production, not a proactive measure taken before production begins.

Therefore, while options A, B, and C are preventive in nature—aiming to avoid defects through planning, education, and monitoring—option D is focused on maintaining the reliability of inspection tools and is considered part of appraisal costs.

As a result, the activity that is not considered a prevention cost is calibrating test equipment.

Question 3

When is an improvement in quality-related costs most clearly demonstrated?

A. Appraisal and failure costs drop
B. Prevention costs increase
C. Total quality costs fall below 15% of total sales
D. Management objectives are met

Correct answer: A

Explanation:
Understanding the nature of quality costs is essential when evaluating the effectiveness of a quality management system. Quality costs are generally grouped into four categories: prevention costs, appraisal costs, internal failure costs, and external failure costs. Improvements in quality are often assessed by analyzing how these cost components change over time.

Appraisal costs are associated with measuring and monitoring activities, such as inspections, testing, and audits, which are designed to catch defects before products reach the customer. These are necessary but non-value-adding costs.

Failure costs are split into internal and external failure costs. Internal failure costs arise when defects are found before delivery to the customer, such as rework and scrap. External failure costs occur after the product has been delivered and include warranty claims, returns, and loss of customer goodwill. These are the most detrimental to both customer satisfaction and long-term business success.

The most direct and clear sign of improvement in quality is a reduction in appraisal and failure costs. This indicates that fewer defects are being produced, so less time and resources are needed for inspection, rework, or compensation. Lower failure rates often signal that the product or service quality has increased.

Option A, therefore, correctly reflects the clearest indication of improvement: when the organization is producing higher quality outputs, the need to inspect or correct those outputs declines. This means resources are being used more efficiently, and customers are more likely to receive defect-free products.

Option B, which mentions an increase in prevention costs, can be a good sign in certain situations because it implies the organization is investing in avoiding defects. However, by itself, this doesn't clearly indicate that actual quality performance has improved. An organization could spend more on training or process improvement without yet seeing a measurable return in terms of fewer defects.

Option C references total quality costs falling below 15% of total sales, which is arbitrary. There is no universal benchmark that proves quality improvement simply by falling below a percentage. The significance depends heavily on the industry and the company’s historical data. Without context, this percentage alone does not offer a clear or reliable indication.

Option D, stating that management objectives are met, is vague. Meeting objectives could relate to many things beyond quality — such as financial performance or project timelines. It doesn't specifically reflect an improvement in quality-related costs unless those objectives were directly tied to those costs.

In conclusion, the most direct and measurable indication of an improvement in quality costs is a reduction in appraisal and failure costs, making A the most accurate and meaningful choice.

Question 4

Which of the following statements best describes typical team behaviors during the "building" phase of improvement team development?

I. The team leader is usually directive.
II. The team leader often delegates tasks.
III. Team members prioritize and perform duties.
IV. Team members are uncertain of their duties.

A. II and III only
B. I, II and III only
C. I and IV only
D. II, III and IV only

Correct answer: B

Explanation:
The process of team development typically follows a model known as Tuckman's stages of group development: Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing. In the context of quality improvement teams, a similar phased structure is often referred to as forming, building, running, and improving or maturing. The building phase is generally characterized by growing trust, increasing task orientation, and the beginning of effective collaboration.

During the building phase, the team transitions from initial orientation (forming) to a more structured and task-oriented mindset. Team roles become clearer, and there is movement toward defining goals, assigning responsibilities, and establishing norms for communication and decision-making.

Let’s evaluate each of the statements:

Statement I: The team leader is usually directive.
This is accurate for the building phase. While the team is still gaining maturity and understanding of roles, the leader typically takes a more directive approach. This helps guide members, reinforce expectations, and provide structure as the team finds its rhythm. Leaders offer direction to reduce confusion and help establish productive behavior patterns.

Statement II: The team leader often delegates tasks.
This is also correct. As team members begin to show understanding and initiative, the leader may start to delegate tasks to encourage responsibility and foster ownership. Delegation reflects the growing confidence of the team and is a necessary step toward building autonomy and trust within the group.

Statement III: Team members prioritize and perform duties.
This accurately describes a key part of the building phase. Although not yet fully independent or high-performing, team members start taking initiative, learning to prioritize their tasks, and contributing more actively to team goals. This stage is the foundation of mature, self-directed teamwork that will emerge later in the performing or improving phases.

Statement IV: Team members are uncertain of their duties.
This statement is more characteristic of the forming phase. In that initial stage, uncertainty is high as members are still figuring out their roles, responsibilities, and expectations. By the time the team reaches the building phase, this uncertainty has generally decreased due to clearer communication, emerging norms, and early leadership direction.

Based on the above assessment, statements I, II, and III all reflect behaviors and characteristics typical of the building phase. Statement IV, however, does not align with this stage.

Therefore, the most accurate choice that describes team activities during the building phase is the one that includes statements I, II, and III.

Question 5

Which of the following does not accurately describe benchmarking?

A. A process for rigorously measuring your performance versus the best-in-class companies
B. A standard of excellence or achievement against which other similar things must be measured or judged
C. Comparing the performance of one company to a set of standards and then to another's performance
D. The search for best industry practices that lead to superior performance

Correct answer: B

Explanation:
Benchmarking is a well-established technique used in quality management, business performance analysis, and process improvement. It involves identifying and learning from the best practices of other organizations to close performance gaps and elevate one’s own capabilities. The essence of benchmarking lies in direct comparisons, analysis, and adaptation of effective practices—not simply the definition of standards.

Option A accurately reflects benchmarking. It involves systematically comparing performance indicators (such as cost, quality, cycle time) against top-performing organizations, often referred to as best-in-class or industry leaders. This rigorous measurement allows companies to identify performance gaps and develop strategies to achieve similar or superior results.

Option C is also valid. It highlights the two-stage comparison process that often happens during benchmarking: first, performance is assessed against a fixed or industry-accepted set of standards; second, it is compared against actual results achieved by competitors or leaders. This layered approach helps distinguish whether performance is subpar because of internal shortcomings or due to broader industry shifts.

Option D emphasizes the purpose of benchmarking—the search for best industry practices. Organizations use benchmarking not only to measure themselves but to learn what methods or processes enable others to succeed. Once identified, these practices can be analyzed and potentially adapted to improve one’s own operations.

Option B, however, is not a correct characterization of benchmarking. This choice defines a benchmark, which is a reference point or standard of excellence. While benchmarks are used within the benchmarking process, defining them is not the same as performing benchmarking. In benchmarking, the process is more dynamic and action-oriented—it’s about seeking out, measuring, and applying best practices, not merely recognizing a level of achievement.

Therefore, while Option B describes a benchmark, it does not capture the essence of benchmarking as a process. Benchmarking involves comparative analysis and strategic improvement efforts, not just establishing a point of reference.

In conclusion, Option B fails to define benchmarking in its true operational and strategic sense, making it the correct answer to the question asking for an exception.

Question 6

What is the most effective method for creating training materials that address performance gaps?

A. Secure a workshop trainer
B. Review a record of activities
C. Set up a one shot case study
D. Allocate employees for training

Correct answer: B

Explanation:
When developing materials for a training program aimed at closing gaps in employee performance, the most effective approach is to begin with a clear understanding of where those gaps exist and what causes them. This foundational insight allows training developers to tailor content directly to the needs of the workforce, ensuring that the training is relevant, practical, and impactful.

Among the choices provided, reviewing a record of activities is the best method. This process involves analyzing documentation such as performance logs, productivity metrics, incident reports, customer feedback, error records, and audit results. These records provide concrete evidence of how employees are currently performing in relation to established standards or expectations. By identifying patterns or recurring issues in these records, a trainer or instructional designer can pinpoint specific areas where performance is lacking. From there, training content can be developed to directly address these gaps.

For instance, if the activity records show consistent errors in data entry procedures, the training can include focused instruction on accurate data handling, perhaps with interactive practice modules. If customer service logs reveal frequent complaints about response time, the training can emphasize time management and communication strategies. This data-driven approach ensures that the training is not generic but instead addresses real, measurable shortcomings.

Now let’s examine why the other options are less effective:

Option A, securing a workshop trainer, may be necessary later in the process, but hiring someone to deliver a session does not contribute directly to the development of training materials. Without first understanding the performance issues, even the best trainer would struggle to deliver effective instruction. The trainer’s success depends on the quality and relevance of the materials, which in turn depends on thorough analysis.

Option C, setting up a one-shot case study, might provide an example for learners to analyze, but it is not a systematic method for identifying training needs. A single case study can offer insight into a specific situation, but it doesn't capture the full scope or recurring nature of performance problems across an organization. It may also miss root causes entirely.

Option D, allocating employees for training, is a logistical step that happens after the training has been developed. It does not aid in the actual creation of materials and presupposes that the training already exists and is appropriately designed. Allocating trainees without understanding their needs could lead to wasted resources and ineffective outcomes.

In summary, developing training materials that truly address performance gaps requires an understanding of actual employee behavior and outcomes. Reviewing a record of activities provides the necessary evidence to diagnose problems accurately, define learning objectives, and build targeted instructional content. This makes it the most essential and effective step in the development process.

Question 7

In general, which of the following roles is least likely to be performed by a facilitator of an improvement team?

A. Be familiar with problem solving techniques
B. Provide feedback to the group
C. Function as the group leader
D. Summarize key ideas generated by the group

Correct answer: C

Explanation:
In improvement teams, such as quality circles or process improvement groups, the facilitator plays a critical role in supporting the team’s function and progress. However, this role is distinct from that of a group leader. Understanding the facilitator’s responsibilities helps clarify what is expected and what would be outside the normal scope of this position.

Facilitators are primarily responsible for guiding the group process, maintaining neutrality, and ensuring that all voices are heard during discussions. They are not there to direct the content or take command of the team’s direction. Instead, they help the group stay focused, manage time effectively, and use appropriate tools and techniques for problem solving.

Option A, being familiar with problem solving techniques, is a key expectation for any facilitator. They need to understand and assist the team in applying tools such as cause-and-effect diagrams, Pareto analysis, or the 5 Whys. While facilitators do not solve the problem themselves, they guide the team through structured thinking processes.

Option B, providing feedback to the group, is another normal responsibility. Facilitators offer observations about how the group is functioning, identify any process breakdowns, and may suggest ways to improve participation or clarity. Feedback from a facilitator helps a team self-correct and improve its dynamics.

Option D, summarizing key ideas, is also within the typical facilitator role. Effective facilitators help capture main discussion points, clarify what the group has agreed on, and ensure that ideas are documented clearly. This helps prevent misunderstandings and supports efficient progress.

Option C, functioning as the group leader, is not a typical role of a facilitator. The group leader is usually a team member who has been designated to manage the group’s activities, take responsibility for decision-making, or coordinate with other stakeholders. The leader may assign tasks, drive decisions, or represent the team’s output. In contrast, the facilitator avoids taking a leadership stance in terms of content and direction. Their neutrality is crucial so that they do not influence decisions but instead support the process that leads to them.

Because the role of group leader entails decision-making authority and directional input—both of which fall outside the scope of a facilitator’s function—this makes C the correct answer. Facilitators work with the group rather than direct it.

Thus, in most cases, a facilitator would not be expected to function as the group leader

Question 8

Which of the following outcomes would not be considered a desirable or ideal result of a quality training initiative?

A. Increased cost-of-quality results
B. Improved working methods and morale
C. Increased productivity and job satisfaction
D. Reduced defects and employee turnover

Correct answer: A

Explanation:
A well-executed quality training program is designed to equip employees with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to perform their roles more effectively and consistently. The goal is to enhance quality at all levels of an organization, reduce errors, and improve customer satisfaction. However, one of the key measures of a successful quality training program is its ability to reduce costs associated with poor quality—such as rework, scrap, and warranty claims—not to increase them.

Option A refers to "increased cost-of-quality results." The term "cost of quality" (CoQ) includes all costs related to ensuring good quality (prevention and appraisal costs) and the costs incurred due to failures (internal and external failure costs). Ideally, a quality training initiative should lead to a decrease in the cost of quality—particularly the failure-related costs—by minimizing errors, defects, and rework. As such, an increase in cost-of-quality results would indicate that the training effort is not achieving its intended outcomes and is instead driving up quality-related expenditures, which is clearly undesirable.

Now let’s look at why the other options represent ideal results of a quality training program:

Option B, improved working methods and morale, is a very positive outcome. Quality training often introduces more effective techniques, standard operating procedures, or continuous improvement tools (like Lean or Six Sigma), which can make work more efficient. When employees feel confident in their roles and see their work improving, morale naturally improves as well.

Option C, increased productivity and job satisfaction, is also a direct and desirable effect of effective training. When employees understand their tasks better and feel supported through proper training, they can perform their work faster and with fewer mistakes. This enhances both individual and organizational productivity. Job satisfaction often improves because employees experience less frustration and feel a greater sense of accomplishment.

Option D, reduced defects and employee turnover, is another important indicator of a successful training program. By enhancing knowledge and skills, training minimizes the number of mistakes made on the job. Additionally, employees who feel valued and properly trained are more likely to stay with an organization, reducing costly turnover.

In summary, all the outcomes listed in options B, C, and D are positive indicators that a quality training initiative is working effectively. However, an increase in the cost of quality, as mentioned in option A, would signal inefficiency or a failure to achieve the training’s intended goals. This makes option A the only response that does not align with the ideal results of a quality training effort.

Question 9

When information passed to upper management often becomes distorted, which of the following actions can help address this issue?
• Stop killing the messenger
• Establish an open-door policy
• Practice management by walking around

A. I only
B. I and II only
C. I and III only
D. I, II and III

Correct answer: D

Explanation:
Distortion of information as it travels upward through an organization is a common problem in many business environments. This distortion can occur for a variety of reasons: fear of reprisal, communication barriers, selective filtering, or a hierarchical culture that discourages transparency. To counteract this problem, organizations must adopt specific behaviors and practices that encourage honest, direct, and open communication. All three actions listed in the question are recognized as effective strategies for achieving this goal.

The first action, stop killing the messenger, addresses a common psychological and cultural problem within organizations. When employees are punished or criticized for delivering bad news, it creates a climate of fear. As a result, staff members become reluctant to report issues or offer critical feedback, which leads to the distortion or suppression of important information. By ensuring that people are not penalized for being honest—even when the message is unfavorable—an organization fosters a more transparent and communicative culture.

The second action, establishing an open-door policy, directly encourages communication between employees and upper management. An open-door policy signals that leaders are accessible and willing to listen. It reduces the layers of filtering that can occur as messages pass through multiple levels of management. While an open-door policy by itself does not guarantee honest communication, when combined with a supportive culture, it increases the likelihood that information will be more accurate and timely.

The third action, management by walking around (MBWA), is a proactive technique in which managers regularly visit different departments, interact with staff informally, and observe operations firsthand. This hands-on approach helps managers hear directly from employees, observe realities on the ground, and detect issues that might not surface through formal reporting channels. MBWA also builds trust and reduces the perceived gap between leadership and staff, making it easier for employees to share honest feedback.

Each of these actions targets a different aspect of the communication problem. Together, they reduce distortion by fostering trust, accessibility, and open lines of communication throughout the organization. They also encourage a culture in which employees feel safe speaking up, and managers are more in touch with frontline realities.

Therefore, the most effective response includes all three actions, making D the correct answer.

Question 10

Which quality expert strongly opposed merit-based pay, individual bonuses, management by objectives, and the practice of ranking employees by performance?

A. Dr. Juran
B. Dr. Deming
C. Dr. Taguchi
D. Dr. Feigenbaum

Correct answer: B

Explanation:
The correct answer is Dr. W. Edwards Deming, who was one of the most influential figures in the history of quality management. He is well known not only for his technical contributions to the field of quality, such as Statistical Process Control (SPC), but also for his strong views on organizational leadership and employee management practices. His philosophies fundamentally challenged traditional Western management styles.

Dr. Deming was openly critical of several widely used management practices, particularly merit-based pay, individual bonuses, performance appraisals, and ranking employees. He believed that these methods were counterproductive and often led to internal competition, fear, and a breakdown in collaboration among employees. His critique was rooted in the belief that the majority of problems in any system are caused not by the workers but by the system itself, which is under the control of management.

One of the central tenets of Deming’s philosophy was that variation in performance is usually the result of the system, not the individual. Therefore, blaming or rewarding individuals without addressing systemic issues only serves to obscure the real problems and can reduce morale. He proposed that focusing on improving the system, rather than punishing or rewarding individuals, leads to more sustainable improvements in quality.

Deming specifically opposed Management by Objectives (MBO) and performance ratings because they often encourage employees to meet short-term goals at the expense of long-term improvement and cooperation. In his famous book, Out of the Crisis, he listed 14 Points for Management, in which he called for the elimination of slogans, arbitrary targets, and numerical quotas, and particularly emphasized the need to drive out fear so that everyone can work effectively.

Let’s briefly examine the other options:

Dr. Juran emphasized quality control and the need for top management involvement in quality improvement. While he advocated for training and employee participation, he did not take as strong a stance as Deming against merit-based systems.

Dr. Taguchi was known for his work on robust design and the loss function, focusing more on engineering aspects of quality rather than personnel management strategies.

Dr. Feigenbaum introduced the concept of Total Quality Control, focusing on integrating quality into all parts of the organization. He promoted team involvement in quality, but he was not notably critical of individual performance systems in the way Deming was.

In summary, Dr. Deming was uniquely vocal in his criticism of merit pay, performance evaluations, and ranking employees, viewing them as systemic obstacles to continuous improvement and teamwork. His emphasis was on building better systems rather than evaluating individuals, which is why he is the correct answer to this question.