But I do try to find the interfaces.
Laboratorians get Quality Management. We may not all do it, but we understand why it exists, and work towards it, each in our own fashion. What Qualitologists try to do is smooth that process out.
And I think that laboratorians have a sense of Risk Management, although I think we see risk in three lumps: risk tolerance, risk avoidance and risk aversion. What we tend not to see is where and how managing risk fits into the the process of managing quality.
There is a small, poorly known, ISO document entitled ISO/TS 22367:2008,Medical laboratories -- Reduction of error through risk management and continual improvement. The TS in the title means it is a "technical specification" rather than a standard. (Think of TS as "guideline"). But it is very helpful, because it links quality management and risk management together at the point of preventive action. The point is that avoiding risk is something that can and should be done before the bad thing happens. And using Risk Management tools like Failure Mode Effects Analysis can be useful. The most common situation in the medical laboratory where FMEA comes into play should be before you purchase the new equipment, before you make an overhaul of management structure, before you introduce that LEAN restructuring. Doing a swap out can be costly of TIME, EFFORT, ENERGY and MONEY, so before you expend it ask "if this goes wrong, why is it likely to happen, and what can I change now to prevent it". It is stunning how often we see changes that go in, and later after all sorts of problems have been discovered, it has to get pulled out. And I know that you have seen it too.
Now we all know the Rumsfeld classification of known problems, known unknowns, and unknown unknowns, and the unknown unknowns will always bite you in the neck. But there are so many problems we can prevent by a little risk management FMEA before hand.