Hello!

I have been working for 2 months on ISO 9001 implementation project for our distribution center (70 employees), but we have not really started because I have not yet received the OK from our president.

Although he believes our company would benefit from ISO 9001, especially to reach new markets, he is most interested in ISO 9001 as a way to improve the internal operations. He does not question the success of the implementation project either.

What he is not convinced about is the "sustainability" of ISO 9001. He is convinced that a few years from now, the first improvements will fade.
I could not find the right answer when he asked me to prove that ISO will continue to improve our operations. We discussed building a culture, respect but that lead us to HOW? using control and supervision?

I don't know how to convince him.
I understand his concern but I have no solution. Please help!

Thank you,

Hello, Clare:

Great questions! Management always ask the right questions, in my experience. It's true that often improvements come and then are lost in time. The benefit of having a documented system is that the improvements become defined as part of the QMS, rather than simply 'tribal knowledge'. I've seen examples of great improvement projects from 'kaizen' events which fll by the wayside, because they weren't documented.

Furthermore, the cornerstones of audits and management reviews should - if he participates in the right way, should ensure sustainability - because it's on his 'radar screen'. Basically it's up to him to drive it, using the tools available to him. He probably just doesn't see how it all fits together for him.

Continual Improvement. It does not stop at first improvements, and has to be carried forward to the next, and so on.

.... that ISO will continue to improve our operations. ....

ISO or ISO9001 does not improve your operations, YOU do, People of the organisation do, Top management does, by incorporating ISO9001 in your operations / management system, by understanding the requirements of the standard and effectively applying them in your operations.

Clause 8 - Measurement, Analysis and Improvement and Clause 5.4.1 - Quality Objectives are the particular answers to your situation.

Also, please refer to Para 1. Scope, of ISO9001:2000 - 1.1 General

I understand your president's concern. It is possible to have a system that doesn't lead to real substantial improvements. This happens in systems that are set up just to meet requirements and pass audits.

To ensure that this doesn't happen, the system must be established based on the needs and goals of the organization. The objectives established should be real business objectives based on the real business processes. Management reviews should be focused on results achieved against the established objectives. Internal audits should also focus on effectiveness of processes to achieve the desired objectives.

My truth is, a lot of the long-term success of the system is dependent on top management. They must ensure that appropriate process and system measurements are in place, and they should review them regularly. Top management must hold the system and people accountable to achieve results. When the right results aren't achieved, they should make decisions and assign actions to improve. The tools listed in clause 8.5.1 must really be understood and used effectively to achieve long-term improvement and sustainability.

I might be a little bit of the devil's advocate her but:
Let's say, top management embraces its role (management reviews, corrective actions, objectives...) but that is the people out on the floor who do the job and how can we ensure that they will always do it with quality?
I understand ISO becomes part of the way they work but how does that happen? What type of training? What level of supervision?

And, how can you estimate the buy-in (management's and employees')?

So many questions.... :thanks:

Continual Improvement. It does not stop at first improvements, and has to be carried forward to the next, and so on.



ISO or ISO9001 does not improve your operations, YOU do, People of the organisation do, Top management does, by incorporating ISO9001 in your operations / management system, by understanding the requirements of the standard and effectively applying them in your operations.

Clause 8 - Measurement, Analysis and Improvement and Clause 5.4.1 - Quality Objectives are the particular answers to your situation.

Also, please refer to Para 1. Scope, of ISO9001:2000 - 1.1 General

I did mention the continous improvement element of ISO 9001 but my president was not convinced. He was saying that hourly employees who will go back to old habits after a while.

Thank you for the detailed references to the standard, that helps a lot!

I might be a little bit of the devil's advocate here but:
Let's say, top management embraces its role (management reviews, corrective actions, objectives...)

If Top Management embraces this new way of doing business and demonstrates their commitment and active involvement, that's the best scenario you can ask for. Missing in many organizations.

but that is the people out on the floor who do the job and how can we ensure that they will always do it with quality?

Constant guidance and enforcement. Positive examples set by their Supervisors.

I understand ISO becomes part of the way the work but how does that happen? What type of training? What level of supervision?

Well, "ISO" does not become part of the way they work, but if you mean the well-designed processes and support functions; yes.

Training? That depends on the difference between what's expected (competence requirements) and what they bring to the job (competencies). That's the job of the Supervisor/coach.

And, how can you estimate the buy-in (management's and employees')?

Simple: success breeds success. People buy in when they experience that their efforts make a true difference. You don't sell folks on quality, they've heard a lot of BS before....

So many questions.... :thanks:

No problem! We're here to help.

Good Luck!

Stijloor.

My 2 francs worth ;)

Firstly, there are a couple of changes we have to make in management and supervision:

Management and supervision should aways be asking "What's the process?" of your people.

When something goes wrong, they must ask, "What happened?", not "Who did it?"

When action is taken, there's always follow through and they ask, "Show me the numbers that prove it's working"

Finally, I've learned that we all follow what our management do - like it is for our home life (in the main) we fashion ourselves after what's important to management. So, if your 'chef' adopts these behaviours and sticks to them, so will others.

BTW - if you involve the people in the improvements they will take ownership and he won't have to worry. No one likes changes forced on them, they have to participate!

Bon chance!

I did mention the continous improvement element of ISO 9001 but my president was not convinced. He was saying that hourly employees who will go back to old habits after a while.

Thank you for the detailed references to the standard, that helps a lot!

Two things here -

1. Improvement, I used continual and you have used continuous, both include each other. Having said that, the improvement needs to be in a planned manner and at an achievable pace within the ambit of your operations and at different levels - right from Top Management (organisational improvements) and at the individual process levels (including those contributing to organisational improvements among others) and then within the process maybe group level or individual levels. The progress of such improvement activities have to be reviewed periodically against the plan to ensure that these are made. (e.g. periodic review of objectives).

You may plan for only a few improvements at one time. All improvements do not happen at the same time (nobody should expect an overnight change!)

2. Standardisation of the processes where you ensure that all employees carry out a process in a specified way. Ofcourse, participation of such employees and their training holds the key. In the begining, though, some enforcement is also necessary, primarily because there may be some resistence to change. But before that, please review the employees 'old habits'. They may be equally effective for all you know. Also an effective approach here is documenting the process involving such employees (also gets their commitment), making only minimal and necessary changes if so required. Thereafter, finding out wether the process is carried out as planned and documented (one of the effective ways is internal audit).

Motivating the employees by making them understand (training) that the planned system will make their work more effective (make them more efficient) and will help in organisational growth may also help.

Let's say, top management embraces its role (management reviews, corrective actions, objectives...) but that is the people out on the floor who do the job and how can we ensure that they will always do it with quality?


Well this has become extremely pertinent in for me in the last 24 hours. We had a work do last night and whilst doing the socialising bit, i heard on several occasions - what's the point of QMS, why have they just hired someone (me) when they already have a person there, and are cutting back with other support staff?

Odd situation to be in but starting to realise that despite the full backing of management, the other employees have no understanding of:
a) what the QMS is
b) what its benefits are
c) why it is so essential
and most importantly have no interest/pep for it. Same goes for ISO 14001 which we are about to implement.

Now we have been 9001 certified for at least 3 years (as far as i am aware) and we do have full QMS training in place (which to me appears thorough).

I am now thinking we need to an internal advertising campaign to improve the QMS' image as its "sustainability" internally seems to be flagging.

Of course it is fun to turn to them and say "did your most recent client ask you if our company was ISO 9001 certified before considering us for the job" - then it starts to sink in as to what would happen if it wasnt there.

I might be a little bit of the devil's advocate her but:
Let's say, top management embraces its role (management reviews, corrective actions, objectives...) but that is the people out on the floor who do the job and how can we ensure that they will always do it with quality?
I understand ISO becomes part of the way they work but how does that happen? What type of training? What level of supervision?

And, how can you estimate the buy-in (management's and employees')?

So many questions.... :thanks:

In my opinion ISO 9001 is useful because has inside some of the "best practices" from different industries and business.
You have to use the process approach to better understand your decide how much control is necessary for your products and how many supervisors. It’s up to you and ISO 9001 have only some basic “common sense” guidance regarding this. For continuous improvement you can find something also in ISO 9004.
If top management embrace its role and really is supporting you and the other manager than you can improve you organization. Otherwise is no value added by ISO 9001 certification.
About the people on the floor you shouldn’t expect a sudden change in their behavior. Everything takes time, but, at all levels, changes can be made if you give them the right training, if you motivate them, if you control them and explain them what they have done wrong and provide them feedback you will succeed.
And ISO 9001 can be also useful to understand and spread your organization know how.
All the best!
Alin

Well, Peter, what you describe is exactly our concern.
I would be interested to know how efficient your internal advertising campaign was, could you please let us know afterwards?
The marketing argument is certainly one of the best.
Thanks for your input,

With pleasure. Firstly i need to let my manager know all is not sailing as smooth as they think, that will be fun. Will post back sometime near the end of next week and let you know what plan i go for and how well it is being received by the masses.

With pleasure. Firstly i need to let my manager know all is not sailing as smooth as they think, that will be fun. Will post back sometime near the end of next week and let you know what plan i go for and how well it is being received by the masses.

Good luck!
:thanx:

One of the things that I have found in regards to ISO/QS/TS etc, is this simple idea.
The "hourly" people do not need to know if it concerns ISO, they need to know that it is the way the company operates.
It is similar (to me anyway) to the original approach to QS. Every element had to own "stand alone" procedure, each was on an island of it's own.
It wasn't until folks started to look at how things worked together (process maps, turtle diagrams, etc).
It's up to the 'gatekeepers", quality engineers, process engineers, etc. to ensure the integration of the standards into the operating system.

Just a quick update. We are planning to tie in our QMS awareness promotion with the results (successful) of our recent external audit. I dont think that this will change the opinions of the people who were previously non-plussed with the QMS. Think it is going to need a face to face approach. Interestingly i have heard little negative about the QMS since the last time i wrote here. Fingers crossed it is a sign of the times (or of the fact that all those people have gone on summer holiday).

Although he believes our company would benefit from ISO 9001, especially to reach new markets, he is most interested in ISO 9001 as a way to improve the internal operations....

What he is not convinced about is the "sustainability" of ISO 9001. He is convinced that a few years from now, the first improvements will fade.

All really, really good questions and great that you are having this debate. It's far better than the 'just get that damned certificate on the wall!'

He is right - the first improvements will fade... they'll either be replaced and built upon, or they'll just fade away, because systems either evolve or break down over time. To make sure that yours evolves, you'll need to ensure then that the improvements are built in, & become embedded into your business system itself- & yes, that includes the 'culture' of the organisation. Which takes a whole bunch of things, including leadership as well as involvement from people 'at all levels'. Those 8 key principles that the ISO 9001 Standard is built on are good ones, & worth thinking about.

ISO 9001 won't do anything in and of itself. Just like a driving licence doesn't guarantee only good drivers are on our roads!

But if the company's president decides what he wants from the system, and is prepared to be involved and champion it, then yes, using the Standard as a model of a sound system will. And what he wants may well change over periods of time. Perhaps initially it's all about achieving consistency, then later the bar gets set higher.

Prove it? Hmm, could be difficult. So many variables across so many companies... Best advice would be to discuss/research with other organisations that did ISO - and did it well and have some discussions with them about their experience. I emphasise it with companies who've done it well - if not, they'll be negative for no good reason.

Let's say, top management embraces its role (management reviews, corrective actions, objectives...) but that is the people out on the floor who do the job and how can we ensure that they will always do it with quality?
I understand ISO becomes part of the way they work but how does that happen? What type of training? What level of supervision?

'ISO' doesn't become part of the way they work - what does is the business system that you (the company) design and do, and which you make sure (by the way) meets the requirements of ISO 9001. ISO 9001 itself is just good business management practice!

Implementing ISO 9001 is a project and almost a process in itself - you start of at a fairly basic level, and you grow, as an organisation, in your understanding of quality and how to use it and apply it, as you gain more practice. In the beginning, the employees may well think it will go away when management gets another idea or fad. (And if there's a history of that happening, it'll take a while to change that.)

But it can also build momentum itself - eg, if you look for an area that frequently mucks up or has problems, then use that as a pilot for improvement, to test out what your're planning, and to get some 'runs on the board'. Then apply in another area, etc.

I think a lot of your questions are actually around the area of managing change in an organisation - have a look at a book called The Change Agents' Handbook: A Survival Guide for Quality Improvement Champions by David W. Hutton which has lots of incredibly useful advice, and very specific guidance.

Revisting this thread has prompted me to remember a situation I encountered as a consultant. A company (I was working with on 'ISO') had previously benefitted from various Kaizen events, SMED implementations etc. as you would expect from these improvement techniques;

In one specific situation, the lead maintenance person had gotten a phone call in the middle of the night because a key item of equipment had failed. The plant had to shut down and, of course, there was all kinds of loss of production etc. associated with this stoppage.

Not fully understanding what was being described, he pulled on his clothes and went into the plant at 3.00am.

He found the key equipment was a small self powered high pressure washer, much like you'd buy at the local Lowes/Home Depot etc. Apparently, it needed a small replacement part - but no-one in maintenance had one.

Indeed, the item of 'key' equipment wasn't on any plant maintenance program and, apart from the personnel in the department, no-one knew this washer existed!

It transpires that the purchase and installation of the high pressure washer was part of an SMED (Single minute Exchange of Dies) improvement event! Except, no-one on the Improvment Team had followed, was aware of or even questioned the need to any Preventive Maintenance processes!! The improvement went undocumented - except for the small work instruction posted on the wall where the washer was being used! (But, of course that wasn't a 'controlled' document)!!

I believe that the moral of the story is that had the company had a well documented management system that people were aware of, were encouraged to use and had 'ownership' of, the chances are this situation wouldn't have happened! Indeed, long after the Kaizen Teams had disbanded, there's a chance that, once committed to some form of document, the improvement would be there for future people to work with!

That's how 'doing ISO' can be used to ensure long term internal benefits. It becomes (well, should) the documented best practice of the organization at a specific time.

Just a quick update. We are planning to tie in our QMS awareness promotion with the results (successful) of our recent external audit. I dont think that this will change the opinions of the people who were previously non-plussed with the QMS. Think it is going to need a face to face approach. Interestingly i have heard little negative about the QMS since the last time i wrote here. Fingers crossed it is a sign of the times (or of the fact that all those people have gone on summer holiday).

Thanks for the update Peter. What type of QMS awareness promotion do you do? In general, I agree with you on a face-to-face approach, some people just need to be convinced, one by one. Good luck!

But it can also build momentum itself - eg, if you look for an area that frequently mucks up or has problems, then use that as a pilot for improvement, to test out what your're planning, and to get some 'runs on the board'. Then apply in another area, etc.

I think a lot of your questions are actually around the area of managing change in an organisation - have a look at a book called The Change Agents' Handbook: A Survival Guide for Quality Improvement Champions by David W. Hutton which has lots of incredibly useful advice, and very specific guidance.

Great idea, I will keep that in mind. I will also look up that book.
So, the real key is leadership and involvement of people?
Thank you very much for your input, very interesting.

That's how 'doing ISO' can be used to ensure long term internal benefits. It becomes (well, should) the documented best practice of the organization at a specific time.

And documentation is the other key!
That's a good example showing documentation is useful.
:thanks:

Great idea, I will keep that in mind. I will also look up that book.
So, the real key is leadership and involvement of people?
Thank you very much for your input, very interesting.

It's not surprising that leadership and involvement of people are two of the eigth principles that ISO 9001 is based upon...

And while we're on the topic of those management principles, I've found that a key one is using data to make decisions - "management by fact".

It's all too easy to get caught up in the emotions of why something's 'good' or 'bad'. People in an organization have agendas of all kinds and often, their rationale for doing something is based on emotions. Just like the oil companies show tv commercials with sludge being dumped on a car, they are working your emotions, since most people don't have data about the condition of their oil! So, oil companies get you to change your oil every 3,000 miles (well, here in the USA) instead of using data to help make the decision.......

So, the real key is leadership and involvement of people?

As Howste points out, there are 8 principles of quality management that the Standard uses as a foundation (I just referred to 2 of them):

Customer focus
Leadership
Involvement of people at all levels
A process approach
Continual improvement
A systems approach to management
A factual approach to decision making
Mutually beneficial supplier relationships


All of them are important (with the possible exception of the last, if procurement/purchasing is not important in your organisation). For example, as Andy has pointed out, a factual approach to decision making is one of the important principles. As a consultant, I remain fascinated at how often, in some organisations I consult to, I find that decisions are made without any real facts/data as the basis! (And after implementing ISO 9001, when the proverbial penny drops, the more intelligent managers are often struck by the same thing).

But the 'principles' (think of them as guiding concepts, if you will) are not the same thing as the actual requirements of the Standard.

Having your system documented is one of the mandatory requirements (must do's) of ISO 9001. In my opinion, it's a requirement because it is a way of acting on some of those principles, and helps achieve the intent.