1. Strategy in the second half of the 1980s: have innovative, high-quality products and be a reliable and responsive supplier.2. (1) Advantages of “half-life”: It will encourage the company to reduce costs and defective tariffs. Total production quality has been improved.(2) Limitations of “half-life”: Focuses only on costs, not revenues. The company's quality goals and objectives were in conflict. The half-life has led the entire company to focus on improving quality, while other key factors have been ignored.(3) The half-life is not the same for all processes. It depends on the complexity of the process. Complexity has two dimensions: technical and organizational. Technical complexity is high for new technologies, where part of the learning process is related to understanding and perfecting that technology. Over time, as the technology matures and its use becomes more routine and familiar, technical complexity decreases. Organizational complexity arises when a process has connections to processes outside its boundaries. These processes can be internal or external to the organization. Connections can be one-way, one-off or interactive, routine, or require real-time negotiation. Therefore processes can run the full organizational gamut, from fully autonomous to cross-functional or interorganizational. As the cultures, goals, and objectives of various actors come into potential conflict, the rate of improvement is expected to slow.(4) Differences between the half-life concept and the experience curve concept: the experience curve Experience, like half-life, is also an empirical observation. It is stated that for each doubling of cumulative experience, the real unit cost decreases by a constant percentage. Half-life deals with defects, not costs. The half-life method, however, predicts that the rate of decline in the defect level is constant over time. The experience curve is a purely empirical observation and is not based on any underlying theory. On the other hand, there is a theoretical basis for the half-life model.3. Conflicts that exist between QIP measures and measures reported by the financial system: QIP objectives are not reflected in the financial system and the financial system cannot be used to measure QIP outcomes. QIP measures the level of defects, which are not reflected in the financial system. The balance sheet numbers should be believed because these numbers would be used publicly and are the measure of the total performance of the company.