Standard Costing vs TQM

Hello Sir. Can you help in the below question. Which TWO of the following are arguments that variance analysis from a standard costing system is redundant in a total quality management environment? 1) For standard costing to be useful for control purposes, it requires a reasonably stable environment. 2) The ethos behind a system of standard costing is that performance is satisfactory if it meets predetermined standards. 3) The control aspect of standard costing systems is achieved by making individual managers responsible for the variances relating to their part of the organisation's activities. 4) Standard costs are set based on ideal standards rather than attainable ones. Question. Sir i understand the logic behind statement 1, 2 and 4 as to why they are correct/incorrect. However my question is why statement 3 is not correct. There has been a somewhat small discussion about the 3rd point in B.P.P's study text, which states "Standard costing systems might measure, say, labour efficiency in terms of individual tasks and level of output. In a total quality environment, labour is more likely to be viewed as a number of multi-task teams who are responsible for the completion of a part of the production process. The effectiveness of such a team is more appropriately measured in terms of reworking required, returns from customers, defects identified in subsequent stages of production, and so on". Moreover sir in a TQM environment we usually assume that the responsibility to deliver quality product/service is responsibility of organisation as a whole rather than a single department or employee. So can Option 3 be correct.