I am wondering, how many companies lost their ISO registrations involuntarily?

Is there a website for such companies?

Just curious.......

I am wondering, how many companies lost their ISO registrations involuntarily?

Is there a website for such companies?

Just curious.......

I know of a couple that I have recommened be pulled, however, I have not worked for a company that had it pulled, came close once but we got our act togther just in time.

I would be interested in how many have "lost" their certs voluntarily too.

I guess no one publishes such records, huh :confused:

The CB (in UK) gives the accreditation body various monthly reports. One of them is for certificates withdrawn. The CB also maintains a register of decertified companies. Whether this information is collated and made publicly available I don't know. The list doesn't normally say whether voluntarily or not but should give a reason for withdrawal.

The problem is, the statistics (if available) would be misleading. If a company receives a major NCR very often they will cancel their registration. So you would class this as volountary when really it's not. Statisitics on major NCR's issued would probably be a better indication. The accreditation does monitor NCR's issued as an indicator of audit(or) efficiency.

Given that CB's don't withdrawn certification (they suspend it) without giving the client the opportunity to fix the problem means that nobody loses certification except those unwilling or unable to take corrective actions.

The last real data they gave was back in 2000 (10th cycle report available on the ISO website)

Canada had 29 that were pulled because they failed their audit and the US had 17. Those are TOTALS up to that date! Most of them probably didn't really care at that point.

Considering Canada had 11,500 registrations and the US had 35,000 at that time, I think we are all pretty safe as long as we pay the invoice.


Carl-

I had the honor of being a newly-hired first-time QA mgr. for a relocated business in my hometown with a brandie -new factory close (1.5 miles)to my house. "Heaven" you might say...Well after about a month of operation, in comes the registrar for the ISO 9002 surveillance / relocation audit and we don't make it through the first three hours (three major NC's). The auditors correctly halt the audit, and meet with the President and give us the choice of a full-blown system (registration level) audit within two weeks, or we could voluntarily(sp) surrender our certificate and the auditors could spend the remainder of the audit as a "gap analysis". Correctly, the President chose the latter option (not without some muttering about what was I [Mr.QA Mgr.] doing for the last 2 mos.?). Quite painful at the time, but also a great learning tool for an organization. Rebuilt the system, found a new registrar, went through the pre-assessment / assessment cycle and became ISO 9002 registered again after about 8 mos. The company was and still is predominantly an automotive industry supplier and they have maintained their registration in various formats in the years since my departure. :tg:

The system is not transparent. IRCA has recently invited suggestions on how to make the accreditation and certification processes more valuable. One of the suggestions I sent them was to require the Accreditation Bodies to have a real-time, on-line searchable database of organizations that are certified by a registrar under their accredited scheme. Similar to the OASIS database maintained by SAE for the Aerospace suppliers.

Such database, should list not only certified organizations, but also suspended and revoked certificates. From a technological standpoint, it would be an easy feat. Politically, maybe not.

If all IAF signatory AB's had something like that, we could easily envision a TRUE worldwide database and the "ISO Survey" would be so much more easily compiled....

The IRCA and ISO are never, ever, EVER going to be open and honest with us about the registration data. There are way too many registrars and companies with their hands in the cookie jar to let that happen.

The radio silence during the 2000 revision change was deafening. They didn't want to report ANYTHING because a huge number of companies were waiting until the last minute to see what everyone else was going to do. It finally got to the point that several insiders admitted that it was physically impossible for registrars to perform all the audits that needed to be done by the deadline. They were handing out certs like Santa hands out candy canes.

Any one of us on this forum could set up a database on a laptop in about 3 hours that would suffice.

All that needs to be done is each accredited registrar e-mail the details as stated on each cert.

It is literally a one person job.

So why hasn't ISO done it?

http://www.worldpreferred.com./

www.whosregistered.com.

Try the above 2 websites. I have not surfed these websites in depth but you may find the data you are looking for.

ISO doesn't register anyone. ISO did not hand out any certificates like candy. There is the world of standards and the world of conformity assessment. ISO is NOT in the business of conformity assessment. And keep in mind that ISO is 99% product standards. Quality Management Systems stuff is a tiny portion of their scope.

Honestly, I do not think ISO cared too much about organizations that procrastinated on their transition from 1994 to ISO 9001:2000. That is an issue for the world of conformity assessment. People confuse conformity assessment with ISO all of the time. Also, there are the users of standards (implementers.) 3 distinct parties. People complain all of the time about ISO when often their grudge is against the assessors of conformity or the inabilities of organizations that implement a standard.

If you want data about registrations, complain to the conformity assessment world. Complain to IATF, ANAB, etc. Complain to the Accreditation Boards of all of the countries around the world. If you want worldwide data, then have that one person (It is a one person job) contact all of the worldwide accreditation bodies of the world and get the data.

Now since it is so easy, when a company gets TS 16949 registered, and this includes an ISO 9001:2000 certificate, how do the Accreditation Bodies count that? That one person can set the formulas for all of the reporting worldwide. They can decide how to count all of the registrations and pulled registrations.

Regards, Dirk

Carl,

I think you have a valid point about lack of statistics but we can excuse IRCA because they do not have access to data from CB's.

Accreditation bodies do get stats from all CB's. I'm not sure if whether there is a secrecy conspiracy going on or just good old civil service type inefficiency. CB's provide data in the form of paper reports. I can't see the accreditation body re-entering data into a database to generate stats. Why they don't request data in electronic format is a mystery in this day and age.

As regards ISO, there only possible source of information is accreditation bodies. So if the accreditation bodies don't have it, I can't see how ISO can get it.

I think accredition bodies look at it from a different perspective. You are seeking to draw global conclusions from the statistics. AB auditors do look at stats for a CB to determine if an area needs close investigation. But for them to act (eg certification being too easy as you seem to allude to) against a CB they would not be able to do that just on stats. They need to pull out client files and look at the audit in depth and even visit the client or order a re-assessment.

I think they are not interested in how many companies "fail". They want to check that certified companies do meet the requirements and the CB is doing an effective audit. Are there stats on people who fail driving tests I wonder.

I think the concept of pass/fail may not be valid since you can correct problems (NCNs). That most pass is hardly a surpise given the standard isn't rocket-science and most have professional consultants helping them. They do not apply if they are not ready and fairly sure of passing. Many have a pre-assessment as well. The certification "pulling" is also skewed for reasons I gave in my previous post.

So basically I'm saying I don't think you would be able to draw valid conclusions from stats even if they were available.

Sidney,

I'm just wondering what your reason is for wanting such a beast. Nothing wrong with it perhaps. As it stands you can verify certificates by contacting the CB. Most now have online databases for people to verify certificates. There are also numerous directories and listings around.

There is a commercial problem with databases in the form of lists. It would be easy for CB1 to get a list of all CB2's clients and email them with an offer to transfer. I wonder how you would like a list of all your clients easily available to your competitors. Take internet domain registrations as a comparison. You can do a whois but to get a list of all clients for a particular registrar is maybe not good for the registrar.

But I agree that whether certification is made public and to what extent is a matter to be clarified and publicly know. If you want a list of a CB's certified clients you can get it. They must make it available to you. The snag is they can charge for it. So if they set a high price that is in effect saying no.

we don't make it through the first three hours (three major NC's). The auditors correctly halt the audit, and meet with the President and give us the choice of a full-blown system (registration level) audit within two weeks, or we could voluntarily(sp) surrender our certificate and the auditors could spend the remainder of the audit as a "gap analysis". Correctly, the President chose the latter option. :tg:

I think it was very admireable for the registrar to offer the options as it did and the decision made by the president. :applause: Thanks for the info... a very much appreciated.

i wonder what is the reason for a new registrar?

Sorry guys, I have been around this track before.

"ISO doesn't give the certification so they aren't responsible"

"IRCA doesn't have data from CB's"

"Registrars are not responsible for the content of the standard"

It is a very convenient setup for no accountability.

For a quality initiative that prides itself on documentation and evidence, this is really inexcusable.

This data is absolutely valuable. It gives a clear indication of the current trends globally.

During the mid 90's, ISO data was EVERYWHERE. Growth of companies being registered was exponential. But as soon as their was an indication that it was slowing.......NOTHING. Why? because they don't want the cash cow to drop off. A whole industry depends on the standards survival, it has nothing to do with whether it is an effective tool, it exists merely because of the framework to support it. Kind of like tolls on the turnpike. It costs more to support the toll booths and infrastructure than they take in in the tolls, but they will never get rid of them because the politicians get campaign contributions and kickbacks from the unions and contractors.

Carl-

Sidney, I'm just wondering what your reason is for wanting such a beast. Maybe, like I said, so anyone could have access 24-7, real time to ACCURATE information if a certain supplier is certified or not? That is exactly what the Aerospace OEMs wanted when they designed the OASIS database, the BEST, most reliable source of information if one wants to know if an organization has achieved 9100/9110/9120 certification.
There is a commercial problem with databases in the form of lists. It would be easy for CB1 to get a list of all CB2's clients and email them with an offer to transfer. I wonder how you would like a list of all your clients easily available to your competitors. Take internet domain registrations as a comparison. You can do a whois but to get a list of all clients for a particular registrar is maybe not good for the registrar. Dennis it all depends on what information you make public and what information you make private. Registrars trying to poach clients from other registrars is an old issue. But, and once again, look at the OASIS database as an example that provides useful information, both publicly and privately, and still has measures in place to avoid “poaching”.

http://www.worldpreferred.com./
www.whosregistered.com (http://www.whosregistered.com/).
Try the above 2 websites. These 2 websites rely on CBs to provide them the information. Many CBs do not provide the information. Further, the data contained therein is primarily North American only.

ISO doesn't register anyone. ISO did not hand out any certificates like candy. There is the world of standards and the world of conformity assessment. ISO is NOT in the business of conformity assessment. And keep in mind that ISO is 99% product standards. Quality Management Systems stuff is a tiny portion of their scope. The ISO 9000/14000 Series of Documents are BY FAR the best selling series of Standards EVER for ISO. ISO 9001 in particular, made the ISO organization a mainstream staple for the business world. ISO has obviously realized that and capitalized on the opportunity. Rightfully so. Make no mistake. Without the corporate world promoting it and the certification industry supporting management system certification, the ISO 9000 family of documents would be a very obscure set of standards. And ISO would be a Geneva based organization known only in the Engineering World. The Management System Standards (few in number, compared to the thousands of ISO product standards) gave ISO attention and recognition they had never experienced before.

ISO has a conformity assessment branch – CASCO (http://www.iso.org/iso/en/comms-markets/conformity/iso+conformity-03.html) -. They are intimately involved with the processes associated for conformity assessment, including accreditation and certification standards.

Since 1992 some individuals have been trying to collect data on the deployment of ISO 9000. It used to be called the Mobil survey. Sometime in the late 90s, ISO took over the survey and it became the ISO Survey. ISO has a tremendous interest in this data.

Maybe, like I said, so anyone could have access 24-7, real time to ACCURATE information if a certain supplier is certified or not?

That sounds reasonable in that people can check whether a particular company is registered. I think most registrars do have online checks (ours does) and if not you can always contact them to request verification. I suppose a central registry would be good if set up right. Maybe the whois for internet domains is a good model.

These 2 websites rely on CBs to provide them the information. Many CBs do not provide the information.

I looked at the sites and yes they have very few listings outside of America. One could argue that incomplete infomation is worse than no information.

If a registry is to work it can only be done by the accreditation bodies since they are the only ones able to force registrars to disclose information.

There are countless companies out there trying to offer some ISO9000 related product/service. A problem with these (countless) private website "directories" is cost. One contacted us and wanted $10,000+ per year to include our clients. So when you have many sites offering the same service it becomes impractical.

Sidney, I don't think the lack of a central registry is down to secrecy. I think its probably more a case of governement agencies being behind the times.

By the way in the UK www.quality-register.co.uk has an extensive list with the advantage that certified companies can register themselves. But they charge $500 subscription for visitors to access the database.

Sidney, I don't think the lack of a central registry is down to secrecy. I think its probably more a case of governement agencies being behind the times. Agree. I have already taken steps to communicate with the IAF and ISO on this, and the IAF initial reaction was favorable.

Thank you Sidney and others. I continue to learn and appreciate the responses. I need to study more on CASCO. Maybe I should have stated that ISO is not in the business of certifying organizations? ISO is and should be concerned with the users' experience with their products, which includes experiences with conformity assessment.

Thank you again.

Sincerley, Dirk

Perhaps an offshoot of this thread should be how many organisations are certified that shouldn't be (or never should have been)

I think it was very admireable for the registrar to offer the options as it did and the decision made by the president. :applause: Thanks for the info... a very much appreciated.

i wonder what is the reason for a new registrar?

The backstory was that the company has gone through a preassessment for QS 9000 at their NYC location with the original CB and had a few minor NC's. Then came the registration audit and the CB sent their QS lead auditor along with the preassessment auditor and voila there were some 23 NC's. The company was in no condition for QS says the CB. Quite rightly the President is pi**ed; what about the preassessment, only a few minors vs. this? The CB offered ISO 9002 registration instead and required CA for the 23 NC's. The kicker was that they had an office on Long Island, but THEY NEVER VERIFIED ONE OF THE NC's ONSITE (23 NC's in an audit!!!). :mad: The cert was mailed to the company and all was great until the first surveillance, on my watch. Of course the company was at fault too, as much of the promised CA was never implemented. So there was plenty of poor behavior to go around.

Needless to say I found this CB's behavior less than stellar, so I did the three quote search, found a registrar with the lowest three year costs who just happened to have been the QS registrar with my previous (19 year) employer. I was an involved implementer for QS as a Sr. QE so I knew this registrar would not let us just buy a cert. They continue as the companies' registrar today... :D

thank you for the insight.....

ISO survey 2003 mentions 10-15% companies have lost registration, mostly during transition period. However, a few have decided not to continue with registration for business compulsions (closure or poor financial reason). A few have lost interest or lacks guidance from consultant or cerification bodies during surveillance or recertification stage. CRBs also de-register companies when they do not respond to notices for surveillance or Re-certification audits.

One can safely assume that 10% of the organizations surrender or do not renew their certificates.

Subhas Biswas
Mumbai, India

I don't know of any companies that "lost" their certification because of failures in an existing QMS. Lets remember what many of you have pointed out: Certification companies are in business too.

I was surprised to see that someone posted that after three major NCRs, the company halted the audit. If I did that, I might not have any customers left sometimes. What I mean is, there is always the possibility to make the corrective actions and stopping that audit is extreme.

I have been known to fail companies during pre audits... and have follow up audits... which are not the same thing.

There have been many companies that migth be listed as losing their certification in Germany, for example, but the reason is not that they failed their responsibilities to a QMS, but rather, the economic stituation made the certification cost too expensive or the company simply went out of business and was placed on a defunct list.

Agree. I have already taken steps to communicate with the IAF and ISO on this, and the IAF initial reaction was favorable.There is hope, I guess. I see a new feature in the ANAB website:
http://www.anab.org/HTMLFiles/images/menuButtons/NOofCerts.jpg (http://www.anab.org/Directory/Certs_Search.asp)

Under Construction

“Certification Totals” is a new feature of ANAB’s site. Data totals refer to ANAB-accredited certificates issued by ANAB-accredited certification bodies (CBs). Certificates accredited by other accreditation bodies and unaccredited certificates are not included in totals. Data can be filtered by CB name, country, standard, and/or any combination of these.

CBs are asked to update the data at least quarterly, but ANAB cannot guarantee that the data reflects complete and accurate information on total ANAB-accredited certificates at a given time.

Please note: Data is unavailable at this time but will be added in the near future.

ANAB's HU 81. New Feature in EQM and on ANAB's Web Site - Number of ANAB-Accredited Certificates (http://www.anab.org/HTMLFiles/docs/HeadsUp/HU81.pdf).

Looks awfully familiar with a suggestion that I had posted here. (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showpost.php?p=117382&postcount=8) Now, who is going to check the accuracy of the data? :cool:

ANAB's HU 81. New Feature in EQM and on ANAB's Web Site - Number of ANAB-Accredited Certificates (http://www.anab.org/HTMLFiles/docs/HeadsUp/HU81.pdf).The ANAB database is partially populated now.
http://www.anab.org/Directory/Certs_Search.asp

The ANAB database is partially populated now.
http://www.anab.org/Directory/Certs_Search.asp

the database seems useless....i searched for QMI, ISO 9001 and Canada and i got ZERO....oh well :bonk:

the database seems useless....i searched for QMI, ISO 9001 and Canada and i got ZERO....oh well :bonk:That is why I said that is partially populated. Not all CB's have sent their data yet. If you leave the CB blank, chose Canada and ISO 9001, you will get 2058 certificates and information on how many each CB has issued.

I find interesting that several US based CB's have not provided their numbers to the ANAB database. I wonder what they are concerned with...:notme: Maybe some previous claims have been overstated and inflated and would not support the factual approach to decision making principle....

Two weeks ago in Dallas, an ANAB representative had stated that the provision of data was mandatory...Looks like some CB's don't know the meaning of that word. Or ANAB can not enforce it....;)