The owner of the place I work for is thinking about contracting a consultant, Quest Analytical Inc. out of Gresham Or. (recommended by one of our customers) We are looking for someone to help us get registered to the 9001:2000 standards. We do not want pay to hang a paper on the wall. We really want to implement a QMS that will work. Has anybody dealt with or heard anything about this outfit? I asked them what registrars they use and was told they commonly use, BFI, TUV, Lloyds, and DNV. The only registrar I have dealt with was BVQI and I really felt like the company that I worked for at the time paid to hang the paper on the wall. Any info will be greatly appreciated.

Why don't you hire someone full time?
If you're that serious about making it real, living system you'll want someone there every day communicating, working, and training everyone.

That's why I was hired into my current job. I am the face of the QMS that eveyone in the company, from the porter to the president, can talk to at any time.

It shouldn't matter what registrar the consultant 'uses'. Some would even say that is a conflict of interest.

If the consultant is any good, and you follow through, you should pass your audit(s) with any registrar. If you like BVQI, then why not use them?

I was hired to help the current Quality Manager get our certification. I feel we have made very good progress ie revised quality manual, work insructions, CA/PA, MRB meetings weekly to address the CA/PA, I have audits waiting to be performed, but when I try to do audits I am told to wait, that there are more important issues (fires to put out). The production manager prefers to scrap out 180 parts and rerun them without documenting the scrap, ie he does not want the owner to know how bad the processes and procedures in the shop are. This is why I want an outsider to come in and show the owner how much room for improvement there is here, he listens to me and likes what he hears, but I have been here less than 18 months, the production manager has been here 15 years, and is always busy running around putting out fires (correcting problems) and he likes it that way they need him here to put out the fires he creates. If they would implement the changes we have made the shop would pretty much run it self, and the prouction mgr would not have much to do.
Thanks to Marc and Discordian for their input.

It shouldn't matter what registrar the consultant 'uses'. Some would even say that is a conflict of interest.

If the consultant is any good, and you follow through, you should pass your audit(s) with any registrar. If you like BVQI, then why not use them?

I agree. I'm a consultant - but I never recommend certifiers to clients. It could be a possible conflict of interest.

I will - only if asked - give them a short list of certifiers that I've had experience of, and what that experience has been. But I flatly refuse to recommend.

I strongly urge every client to take the same care in selecting their certifier that they would with any other important supplier. ie, define some criteria, choose 2 - 3 and approach them, compare the response to their criteria, etc. Talk to some existing clients of the certifiers, ask around, research!

And of course I'll work with a certifier I haven't worked with before if that's who the client selects.

Any good professional consultant, IMO, should do the same.

It would be worth asking the consulting firm why they nominate those firms.

I would take the approach of getting references from Quest Analytical's clients in your area.

Go visit them and see if they have the results that you are looking for.

If you have updated the documentation and fixed most of the processes, why do you need a consultant?

It seems that the problem may be management commitment since it seems that your management wants be in a fire-fighting mode as opposed to a pro-active mode.

Maybe you need a consultant to push management. But does management want to be pushed?

You should schedule internal audits and a management review and then decide if you need a consultant to help you with your issues.

Danny

Danny

If you have updated the documentation and fixed most of the processes, why do you need a consultant?


Gee, correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't see the question 'should we use a consultant?' But then, maybe I"m feeling sensitive. Sometimes I sure do get a trifle weary of consultant-bashing.

Gee, correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't see the question 'should we use a consultant?' But then, maybe I"m feeling sensitive. Sometimes I sure do get a trifle weary of consultant-bashing.

Given the information available, it seemed a legitimate question. Suggesting that a consultant might not be necessary is not the equivalent of "consultant-bashing," unless you believe that there's never a time when consultants aren't necessary. Sometimes we need to ask for more information if we're going to give helpful answers.

FWIW:
Too many folks equate the term "consultant" with "contract worker."

In my view, a consultant helps the client learn to do the task so the client can continue once the consultant is gone.

The "contract worker" (too many bill themselves as "consultants" IMO), comes in and performs the tasks for the client, usually creating an opportunity for a continuing gig so the client doesn't have to learn how to do the task.

There is ample room for both consultants (I prefer the term "advisor") and contract workers, but I am unhappy with folks who come in and word process generic versions of quality manuals and procedures to include the client's name and call themselves "consultants" when they are merely overpaid typists.