Ego is the main culprit for these kind of situations. The solution is simple, to have clear communication at every stage of processing as well as to accept when one party or the other has made mistake which needs to be rectified.

When marketing is not included in the conversation the impasse is likely to persists. Marketing, R&D and operations all have a stake in the problem and it is marketing that drives the details for quality. Often times resolving an issue like this will require an investment in operations to improve their manufacturing capabilities.

I think R&D team should be practical and under the overall production process. Two way feedback is essential. On top of this, the commitment of the top authorities is very essential.

It’s essential to align on shared goals like customer satisfaction and product reliability. Open communication is key—regular discussions can help both teams understand each other's priorities. Collaborating to define realistic, mutually agreed standards ensures feasibility and innovation. Pilot production runs allow testing under real conditions, highlighting areas for adjustment. Building empathy through cross-training and, if needed, involving a neutral mediator can also help bridge the gap. Ultimately, fostering a culture of collaboration ensures both innovation and practicality work hand in hand.

Here's how we can try to bridge this gap effectively: Create collaborative teams that include faculty/institute members, researchers, and industry partners to ensure mutual understanding and cooperation. Implement structured meetings that focus on quality challenges and solutions. Develop standardized protocols outlining quality expectations from initial research to industrial application. Leverage measurable indicators to assess and refine quality standards. Pilot testing within the faculty’s laboratories or partnered industries before broader implementation. Secure active involvement from faculty leadership and industry partners. Organize joint workshops and training sessions for students, faculty, and industry representatives.

Overcoming quality standard issues in R&D and production requires collaboration, clear communication, and alignment on goals. Start by establishing standardized quality benchmarks that both teams understand and agree upon. Conduct joint reviews of specifications and processes to identify discrepancies early. Use data-driven approaches like root cause analysis to address issues and implement corrective actions. Foster cross-functional meetings to bridge gaps and share insights. Invest in training to ensure both teams are aligned with regulatory and quality requirements. By maintaining transparency, mutual respect, and a focus on the end goal—delivering a high-quality product—one can find common ground effectively.

One thing I have found useful is that production teams must first be trained and have full appreciation on the significance and criticality of having and adhering to quality standards. Also if they know the exact risks of non compliance, then there will be more collaboration than resistance because the purpose of doing it is clear.

1. Facilitar la comunicación abierta • Reuniones conjuntas • Fomentar el respeto • Identificar el objetivo común 2. Definir estándares claros y objetivos • Establecer criterios medibles • Basarse en normas reconocidas • Consultar expertos externos. 3. Promover la colaboración desde el inicio. 4. Implementar un enfoque basado en datos • Análisis de fallos: Utilizar herramientas como análisis de causa raíz (RCA) o diagramas de Ishikawa para identificar los problemas reales detrás de los desacuerdos. • KPIs compartidos: Definir indicadores claves. 5. Capacitación conjunta • Talleres de resolución de conflictos. 6. Nombrar un mediador o enlace • Coordinador de calidad • Revisión periódica 7. Crear un marco para manejar conflictos

Keep it simple. Listen to your team. You pit them there for a reason. Address their concerns and consider their input. Guide them into collecting usable data...useful data. Also, be prepared to accept that expecting a result doesn't always mean you get that result. If you set up the proper data collection methods at the start of a program or product development effort, and stay true to the plan, you won't have conflict, you'll have debate. Debate should be encouraged because it, generally, leads to better ideas. People prefer conversation over conflict.