As with other industries, pork producers have looked to improve their performance with improvements in quality, but quality has different meanings for different people in different areas. Such differences in the interpretation of quality allude to the challenges of system optimization. Priorities differ among different segments of production and different functions within an operation. Some objectives may be easier to balance than others, and with an imperfect system, is it better to focus on least cost or strive for most profit? In the absence of a universal definition of quality throughout a system, how can system-wide optimization be achieved? A true or full optimization is a worthwhile goal and yet virtually impossible under current circumstances. We are limited by the measurements that we can and do make of swine production. We must identify the full range of the challenge and then choose those factors that are most likely to affect the outcome. This can be done subjectively, but is often limited, in large enterprises, by the lack of knowledge of the full system. Moreover, nonlinear relationships between inputs and outputs are rarely assessed correctly if left as a subjective concern. The concept of Quality Management has evolved over the last several decades. The core principles of Quality Management, as adopted by the International Organization of Standards are customer focus, leadership, involvement of people, process approach, system approach to management, continual improvement, factual approach to decision making, and mutually beneficial supplier relationships. There have also been three general assaults on quality management in swine farming over the last number of years. They include, expansion of size and localization of responsibility, lack of measurement for factual assessment of quality, and a lack of management accounting. There’s a general reluctance to admit to the high level of complexity of pig production. There are very few manufacturing processes that involve such a broad range of inputs with variable quality and interactions with outcomes. Given this high level of complexity, the swine industry is particularly reluctant to invest in production monitoring methods, as well as analytic protocols. Optimization of production processes requires adequate investment in records, people and methodological skills. When such resources are available, the opportunities for improvement in swine production rise to a new threshold. There is a technique in quality management called the “Five Why’s”. When there is a problem, there should be not only one why but a set of at least five why’s linking the system together. These sequences are difficult to do but highly advantageous when solved. For instance pigs die in the nursery because of H. parasuis. They die of the disease because they were weaned too light. They were too light because they were too young. They were too young because too many sows farrowed. Too many sows farrowed because there were an excess number of sows rebred with a subsequent high farrowing rate. These were returns because of seasonal infertility. Seasonal infertility occurred because of a low farrowing rate caused, at least in part, by single matings during the summer. And so we can go on. Optimization of the system is recognizing the links and emphasizing them as common responsibilities. It is something that we are starting to do, but the opportunities are endless.