Garvin proposes eight critical dimensions or categories of quality that can serve as a framework for strategic analysis: Performance, features, reliability, conformance, durability, serviceability, aesthetics, and perceived quality.

1. Performance

Performance refers to a product's primary operating characteristics. For an automobile, performance would include traits like acceleration, handling, cruising speed, and comfort. Because this dimension of quality involves measurable attributes, brands can usually be ranked objectively on individual aspects of performance. Overall performance rankings, however, are more difficult to develop, especially when they involve benefits that not every customer needs.

2. Features

Features are usually the secondary aspects of performance, the "bells and whistles" of products and services, those characteristics that supplement their basic functioning. The line separating primary performance characteristics from secondary features is often difficult to draw. What is crucial is that features involve objective and measurable attributes; objective individual needs, not prejudices, affect their translation into quality differences.

3. Reliability

This dimension reflects the probability of a product malfunctioning or failing within a specified time period. Among the most common measures of reliability are the mean time to first failure, the mean time between failures, and the failure rate per unit time. Because these measures require a product to be in use for a specified period, they are more relevant to durable goods than to products or services that are consumed instantly.

4. Conformance

Conformance is the degree to which a product's design and operating characteristics meet established standards. The two most common measures of failure in conformance are defect rates in the factory and, once a product is in the hands of the customer, the incidence of service calls. These measures neglect other deviations from standard, like misspelled labels or shoddy construction that do not lead to service or repair.

5. Durability

A measure of product life, durability has both economic and technical dimensions. Technically, durability can be defined as the amount of use one gets from a product before it deteriorates. Alternatively, it may be defined as the amount of use one gets from a product before it breaks down and replacement is preferable to continued repair.

6. Serviceability

Serviceability is the speed, courtesy, competence, and ease of repair. Consumers are concerned not only about a product breaking down but also about the time before service is restored, the timeliness with which service appointments are kept, the nature of dealings with service personnel, and the frequency with which service calls or repairs fail to correct outstanding problems. In those cases where problems are not immediately resolved and complaints are filed, a company's complaints handling procedures are also likely to affect customers' ultimate evaluation of product and service quality.

7. Aesthetics

Aesthetics is a subjective dimension of quality. How a product looks, feels, sounds, tastes, or smells is a matter of personal judgment and a reflection of individual preference. On this dimension of quality it may be difficult to please everyone.

8. Perceived Quality

Consumers do not always have complete information about a product's or service's attributes; indirect measures may be their only basis for comparing brands. A product's durability for example can seldom be observed directly; it must usually be inferred from various tangible and intangible aspects of the product. In such circumstances, images, advertising, and brand names - inferences about quality rather than the reality itself - can be critical.

Quality Frameworkk

1. Definition and outline of the framework

Quality is a very broad, generic and subjective concept.  The aim of this quality framework is to make quality more objective, applicable and measurable within the scope of the cultural sites on the Web.

2. Objectives

Quality criteria enable institutions to express the work done in developing their sites and the high quality of their content in a discoverable way.  The objective is not to regulate the cultural content on the Internet but to support visibility, transparency, understanding and confidence in cultural sites on the web, whatever their size.

The development of quality can be seen from two perspectives: the "external" final product (as it is perceived directly by the end-user); and also the process of development of the Web site, i.e. the "internal product" (addressing technical and technological aspects such as the quality of the software code and architecture, of the digitization standards, of metadata, etc.)

The quality criteria have therefore a double objective.  On the one hand, they represent the quality factors for evaluating the quality of a cultural site on the Web.  On the other hand, they direct and support the process of design and of development of a cultural web site.  However, any framework has to provide certain evaluation methods to make it possible for institutions and for the users to measure the level of quality achieved by a given "product".

The work carried out up to now has focused on the quality of the "external product" of the WEB cultural sites, particularly since there are guidelines and good practice for improving technical design emerging from other domains and sectors which should eventually be taken into account.

3.  Users

The user is at the centre of this initiative which aims to give him access to readable, ergonomic sites, with certified content.  

The principal users for the quality evaluation framework are the following "entities": 

 -                      Cultural institutions

 -                      End-users

-                      Political and ministerial institutions which are responsible for promoting quality standards and for co-ordinating digitization efforts in the field of cultural heritage 

-                      Developers and evaluators of cultural sites on the Web 

4. Benefits 

Quality marking for digital content creates confidence in the user.  The aim is not to sanction those Internet sites which do not meet the quality criteria, but to identify positively high quality cultural information.  This will help guide users in their search for high quality content.

 The expected benefits of a quality framework, targeted at the "external product" include the following: 

 -                      The framework can represent a reference model

 -                      The framework can promote standardization and interoperability of cultural sites on the web 

-                      If quality criteria are also made available to end-users (for example, in the form of on-line questionnaires), the framework can encourage a more critical attitude among end-users towards cultural sites on the Web and can increase the maturity web site market

  5.  Overview of the quality framework

 A framework is an evolving entity, which will be extended and improved.  Moreover, it is intended to be defined as the result of cooperative efforts at European level.  The evolutionary and co-operative nature of the definition process provides the framework of quality with additional benefits:

 -                      The framework can encourage cooperation between Member States and can promote the establishment of networks focused on quality issues

 -                      It can emphasize the common cultural heritage of Europe