I believe it comes off as a burden because Quality are the people who tend to reject or question every detail of a report or analysis.

You want to get product that moves out the door in a timely matter. Quality Control, most of the time, requires 100% inspection of a lot or doing First Article Inspections on a certain amount of product. These things are time consuming and if you find that product in the lot that gets rejected, chances are the whole lot gets rejected before it gets moved out the door. So to your point, yes you want Quality to catch it before it hurts the company in the long run. Is it necessary? Absolutely. Can Quality processes be improved? YES. And that is where I think the issue lies. Depending on the company processes, trying to convince Quality that there are better ways to improve the Quality Control and Quality Assurance processes is a difficult task. I’ve found sometimes some of the Quality processes are unnecessary and it would be more effective and robust to just remove this process all together.

In addition, most drivers for a company are within this cycle below:
http://blog.heyunka.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/QCD4.png

However, I think its difficult to appease all 3 and usually companies end up sacrificing 1 of the 3 and that tends be quality in some cases.