I’m sure this topic is all too familiar, but, it bears mentioning again. We began our “Day One” session with our Consultant retained to drive our ISO 9001-2000 effort with a solid commitment from all participants to do their part. The consultant has left, leaving behind 8 “Home Work” assignments to complete before his next session. After measuring the impact on the time to do things, a time frame agreed to by all participants, it has been decided that we will tell the consultant when it’s time to come back. After all, “we’re paying him”. “Everybody is too busy and we don’t have enough people”. Nobody said a word while the consultant was here regarding time frame and manpower. In fact, the amount of people and time were agreed on during session one. Heads were nodding in the affirmative. After discussing with the consultant, via telecon, the need to acquire more business and the other excuses, he expressed the sentiment that I may be intimidated by the decision makers. I said, “You’re damn right. You don’t work here and if they feel that staying afloat is more important, who am I? Just another earner.” I guess I’m just venting and this forum is the place to do it. Probably rings a bell with others who have had pipe dreams about getting registered. There, I feel better now. We’re doomed!
energy

Energy
Hang in there! Most of us have had many negative experiences trying to become registered to a standard and we know how frustrating it can be. Your not doomed.

Greg

Dear Energy,
You're not gonna tell me that after 35 years in the game this was a new experience?

0. Is a 9001:2000 registration necessary? If so, proceed.
1. Fire the consultant.
2. You draw up what needs to be done to shift to 9001:2000.
3. Break it up into bite size chunks (even small bites will do).
4. Allocate a repsonsible person.
5. Draft up a schedule of implementation.
6. Send out the draft to all concerned.
7. Deal with comments.
8. Get commitment from the CEO/MD or whoever the hell is running the place. Remind them of why THEY need this (refer step '0').
9. Explain it to those who have responsibilities.
10. You DRIVE it.

From my experience, most people in quality were unpopular before they were involved in quality - that's why they got the job, so don't lose sleep if you have to use your seal club and Marc's cattle prod.




------------------

Originally posted by David Mullins:

1. Fire the consultant.If the consultant is not helping you.

Numerous times I have gone to the plant manager or other 'principle' about this type of problem.

->Nobody said a word while the consultant was here regarding
->time frame and manpower. In fact, the amount of people and
->time were agreed on during session one. Heads were nodding
->in the affirmative.

This is very, very normal. I do much the same way. I sorta give assignments. What I do is look at each implementation as a project. I start out with a project schedule - usually in MS Project because most larger companies have it, but you can use, and I have used, Excel.

From this point is will soon become clear whether management gives a **** or not. I recommend establishing a weekly status meeting and pulling out the project plan. Everyone gets to go through their status and 'roadblocks'.

The key is whether or not upper mangement is involved in this. I have seen project schedules completely rejected 6 weeks into the program. I have literally quit several companies - it was obvious no one gave a **** and their failure would be blamed on (who else) the consultant.

->After discussing with the consultant, via telecon, the
->need to acquire more business and the other excuses, he
->expressed the sentiment that I may be intimidated by the
->decision makers.

In my opinion (print this out and give to your consultant - or hire me{!}) it is now time for your consultant to do his/her job - by going to top management and explaining the roadblock and the effects on the projected schedule. Your consultant should be ready to explain the expectations, how they were not met and what she/he believes is the root cause of the failure to keep up with the 'homework' (schedule).

You should be able to use your project schedule to track progress and to detail who is behind. See http://Elsmar.com/Imp/sld096.htm and http://Elsmar.com/Imp/sld103.htm

I must say it has been the rare implementation where this was not at least somewhat of a problem. It's a pretty 'natural' thing. But what will happen depends upon the company personality (which is set by upper management).

I try to make a big deal out of the fact that it will take a lot of time from people, typically, from 20% minimum to 75% of each week to address ISO issues. I also make a big deal out of the possibility that there may be a need for contract help. A client of mine last fall found they had boxes of legacy documents to control. I went, with my contact, to the CEO and explained they could not do what they had to do in the time they had to do it without outside help. The CEO got the help needed.

->"Everybody is too busy and we don't have enough people".

They always say this.

->In fact, the amount of people and time were agreed on
->during session one. Heads were nodding in the affirmative.

Again, this is almost inevitable at many companies. Everyone nods OK but as soon as the meeting is over - nothing happens except for people saying they don't have time for it.

Best of luck! It's not always fun.

[This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 24 April 2001).]

Another thought:

I started an implementation with a company 18 months ago. I told them it was a 6 month project for them. They ended up taking the 'business as usual' route (see http://Elsmar.com/Imp/sld094.htm ). They're almost finished...

David M.

My 35 years experience, up until 2-3 years ago was with those great Mil Specs MIL-Q-9858, MIL-I-45208, etc. No guess work there. You either implement them or no contract. I’ve worked for a company said that they were compliant. Never had the courage to bring in a Registrar. (Company Ownwers decision). Another company that went to training sessions for 8 months and no one did their assignments. All responsibility fell to one person. Doomed. The team I’m with now comprises approx. 75% of those people. Doomed. All the note worth points you make is exactly what our consultant said we must do. However, when told “ we pay him. We’ll let him know when he can come in again”, there was a stifled response. Unless the consultant wants to walk away, he has no choice but abide by Management’s decision. I’m sure that there are those who will say that they would walk away, on principal, but the lion’s share of his “fee” has not been paid yet. (Yes, he gets most of it up front). Once he gets his cash, it would be easier to walk. O.K. folks, back to work.
energy

Assuming that there is an existing quality system your company is working to, I think it would be valuable to analyze the current strengths, (and weaknesses), and contrast that with the requirements of ISO9000 2000 and generate a Gap Analysis. First of all, it allows upper management to realize that they have some good systemic ways of doing things, (or bad, but at least they could see it on paper), and see how far they are from being compliant to the new standard. The psychological advantage is that they can see that they're not starting completely from scratch and that progress is already in place for some percentage of their system. It also pinpoints exactly where the "new" focus needs to be. Those newly defined initiatives can then be broken into reasonable chunks to maximize resources.

Don't change everything just to address a new standard. Take the best you already have and build from it. Incorporate those existing successes into the plan and management will be happier that they only have to complete half rather than all! It also shows them what they already have invested. If nothing is already invested, they probably don't care too much about quality as a systemic approach, anyway, and they need to get that religion before they go any further. Otherwise, you're left with the responsibility of implementing something they don't understand, embrace, or support.

Just my humble opinion...

------------------
See you down life's highway!

Eric

Eric,
We have nothing in place except what's in people's noodles. I have the majority of the generic documentation prepared. Just needs the task leaders to review, modify, etc.. I've provided the form, thay have to provide the content. Basically, we investigate any Customer Complaints in a reactive fashion. And, guess what? Our Customers love us. Can you figure? Flies in the face of our passion for a "Quality System".
energy