Originally Posted by
WideScreen
I don't know the report, though let me 100% accept your qualification of it.
A major aspect is:
Result = (quality of the solution) * (acceptance of the solution).
I think, IF a report was written having the quality you would like to see, it would have been completely unacceptable for all involved and as such, thrown aside.
The marginal quality report they got, it got accepted internally and (as a first step) implemented. From there, the next steps would be the way to go, as has been done.
Compare that with an ISO-9000 quality system. Very nice, but the ISO-9000 doesn't have a growth path towards a higher quality level, it just "nails" the level and find out yourself, how the organization does reach the described quality level. When the step from the current situation isn't that big, it's somewhat manageable. When the current situation is pure chaos, introducing a QA system will be a nightmare and outright fail to get implemented. See my earlier writings, on how difficult it is to significantly change the culture (IE implemented QA level ....) of an organization.
At the time, a formal IOSA type report conducted by IOSA competent auditors would have been beneficial and indeed those reports were done later, and are appropriately not public domain.