Hey guys. Guess what ? I got a new job !
Anyways.. I have been put in charge of getting us ISO9001:2008 certified. We are a small welding shop (50 people). Place is a MESS. Disorganized, no clear process flow. No Quality manual, no procedures (written), etc. Get the pic ?
I received a call from a firm that wants to help us get registered. Wants to come in, interview us, write the manual, procedures, etc, audit us internally, then externally. I read in the threads the other day that there are some shady firms out there. Is this a good way to go ?

Thanks in advance

Congrats on the new job ! Sounds like you have your work cut out for you !
If you are a small firm, I would do it all yourself... if you have the means (management support, $$ to invest in training (you and employees) and know-how on how to do it), roll up your sleeves and get to work. Sounds like a good challenge.

In regards to shaddy companies, yes there are a few in every country and in every business... if you want to use an outside firm/consultant, check around here, references etc...

Hey guys. Guess what ? I got a new job !
Anyways.. I have been put in charge of getting us ISO9001:2008 certified. We are a small welding shop (50 people). Place is a MESS. Disorganized, no clear process flow. No Quality manual, no procedures (written), etc. Get the pic ?
I received a call from a firm that wants to help us get registered. Wants to come in, interview us, write the manual, procedures, etc, audit us internally, then externally. I read in the threads the other day that there are some shady firms out there. Is this a good way to go ?

Thanks in advance

Jguns - good for you! Looks like some work is ahead of you! Now, just to make things clear, this company is going to do pretty much everything? All the documentation, and both internal and external audits? Mmmmm, seems strange.

An Accredited Certification Body can't do that (of course)! If a consultant does do that, they won't be able to 'certify' you to ISO 9001:2008, either - well, at least not in any way your customers would understand. If certification is what you mean by 'external audit'.....

Thread renamed and moved to the consultants forum.

Having someone come in and write the stuff for you is good from the standpoint that it frees you up to get product out the door. However, there are some disadvantages:

1) You are paying someone to type your procedures. Normally, they get paid a great deal more than what you would pay a typist.
2) You pay them to get aquainted with your processes, and even then, they might not understand them as well as they should.
3) If they write your documentation, then they have ownership... not you. You have to do things their way. They will undoubtedly have procedures that you don't like. I have seen one instance where the purchasing procedure stated that the Director of Purchasing initials all P.O.'s. Problem is they didn't have a Director of Purchasing, so they created the title for one person. Also, lack of ownership might lead to folks not following procedures.

Also some consultants will want to marry your company.

Overall, I think it is a good idea to get someone to help you, but it is important for you (meaning your company) to do the work.

Hey guys. Guess what ? I got a new job !
Anyways.. I have been put in charge of getting us ISO9001:2008 certified. We are a small welding shop (50 people). Place is a MESS. Disorganized, no clear process flow. No Quality manual, no procedures (written), etc. Get the pic ?
I received a call from a firm that wants to help us get registered. Wants to come in, interview us, write the manual, procedures, etc, audit us internally, then externally. I read in the threads the other day that there are some shady firms out there. Is this a good way to go ?

Thanks in advance

As both a consultant and an auditor for registrars, I think it is a good idea to hire experts to help you, if you are not expert yourself. However, what you describe sounds a little suspect. It sounds like the company is simply going to hand you a system and certify it. That does not help you much, it only gives you a certificate. Your objective should be to get a good management system that will help you run your company better.

You might want to compare them to a few other companies, and then decide. There are some good consultant companies here on Elsmar. You can read our comments and learn much about us just by reviewing what we say on Elsmar.

The below quotes from Cove members are all good points.

I'd like to emphasize the difference between a "contract tech writer" and a "consultant."

A consultant's job is to help you and ALL the folks in your organization put together a Quality Management System (QMS) which fits your business and will help it be successful. Just incidentally, he will also help you understand how your good QMS will coincide with the requirements of an ISO Standard (or SAE-Aerospace Standard) to satisfy requirements of some of your customers who may request all their suppliers to have actual certification/registration to such a Standard.

If the consultant does his job correctly, you will write your own manuals and procedures, using language you and your fellows are familiar with and (with the knowledge you have gained from this consultant) will be able to revise these documents in the future as your organization's need may require.

The bare bones description provided in the first post is of a "contract tech writer," regardless whether it is an individual or a firm. Essentially, with some minor variations, such a contractor starts off with a portfolio of generic documents (manuals, procedures, work instructions, etc.) and after a cursory examination of your operation, he will cut and paste in those documents to present you your own portfolio of documents. I want to emphasize that such documents will almost always pass a desk review by an auditor from a Registrar examining your organization prior to conferring registration to one of the international Standards. The "gotcha" part comes during the personal site visit to see if your actual operation matches the story put forth in the documents. Sadly, many organizations don't really have the ability to match the ideal set forth by those documents (without additional instruction and training) and sometimes a whole lot of screaming, shouting, and name-calling takes place.

In rare instances, an organization isn't that far off the ideal to begin with and so passes the on-site audit without too much trouble sometimes with a few inconsequential "opportunities for improvement" or minor nonconformances which are easily remedied.

Bottom line:
Whether your organization can get by with a "contract tech writer" or should hire a consultant to help everyone in the organization learn about, create, and implement an efficient, effective QMS on its own is is a question which different Cove members might answer differently after actually performing a gap analysis to determine the gaps between your current operation and the type of operation most likely to get registration to an international Standard. A big part of that opinion will include a bias for or against consultants or contract tech writers, depending on the Cove member's personal experience with either or both types of assistance.

Hey guys. Guess what ? I got a new job !
Anyways.. I have been put in charge of getting us ISO9001:2008 certified. We are a small welding shop (50 people). Place is a MESS. Disorganized, no clear process flow. No Quality manual, no procedures (written), etc. Get the pic ?
I received a call from a firm that wants to help us get registered. Wants to come in, interview us, write the manual, procedures, etc, audit us internally, then externally. I read in the threads the other day that there are some shady firms out there. Is this a good way to go ?

Thanks in advance

Having someone come in and write the stuff for you is good from the standpoint that it frees you up to get product out the door. However, there are some disadvantages:

1) You are paying someone to type your procedures. Normally, they get paid a great deal more than what you would pay a typist.
2) You pay them to get aquainted with your processes, and even then, they might not understand them as well as they should.
3) If they write your documentation, then they have ownership... not you. You have to do things their way. They will undoubtedly have procedures that you don't like. I have seen one instance where the purchasing procedure stated that the Director of Purchasing initials all P.O.'s. Problem is they didn't have a Director of Purchasing, so they created the title for one person. Also, lack of ownership might lead to folks not following procedures.

Also some consultants will want to marry your company.

Overall, I think it is a good idea to get someone to help you, but it is important for you (meaning your company) to do the work.

As both a consultant and an auditor for registrars, I think it is a good idea to hire experts to help you, if you are not expert yourself. However, what you describe sounds a little suspect. It sounds like the company is simply going to hand you a system and certify it. That does not help you much, it only gives you a certificate. Your objective should be to get a good management system that will help you run your company better.

You might want to compare them to a few other companies, and then decide. There are some good consultant companies here on Elsmar. You can read our comments and learn much about us just by reviewing what we say on Elsmar.

I agree with Dave. You have to know, understand and justify what is said based upon the requirements that you are corking too. As a consultant I have seen canned programs and you can spot them a mile away when you don't take wonership by putting it in your words and making it to document what you do in your own shop.
Procedure/work instructions document step by step what you do to perfrom a QUALITY task. A quality program needs to start with processes that affect quality.

Dave, I can't let this one go by, because there's so much I disagree with and some that, as a consultant, I find somewhat insulting.
1) You are paying someone to type your procedures. Normally, they get paid a great deal more than what you would pay a typist.
And good ones - or even just reasonably competent ones - will deliver a great deal more than simply typing! Such as - finding out the information, putting it together in a logical order, considering alternative (and more user-friendly ways of presenting information), highlighting weaknesses and places where things don't make sense/don't connect... and that's just for a start. And one reason why they should be paid more. If all I was doing was typing something up a/I'd feel guilty because I'd know I was ripping the client off and b/I'd be bored out my brain and c/I'd find an alternative. Just typing? They could get a temp typist if necessary to do that, and cheaper. Have I told clients that? Yes!

2) You pay them to get aquainted with your processes, and even then, they might not understand them as well as they should.
True to some extent. But again good ones are experienced at process analysis and can pick things up very fast. Much faster (usually) than internal people could - that's why you get in consultants! and that's what they're supposed to do. No, they won't know the details - but many times, many organisations still struggle mightily with what processes are and how to think 'process' as opposed to department/task/procedure.

3) If they write your documentation, then they have ownership... not you. You have to do things their way.
Oh, unfair and not true. I work very hard to make sure that if by any chance I do some of the writing, that my clients are fully involved, review them, and make all the important decisions, such as which format they prefer, what 'works' and feels right for their organisation. Because I want them to own it, not me! And keep working to ensure that this happens. And the other good consultants I know have the same ethos. I doubt that any of theirs or my clients (for example) would say 'we had to do it their way'. This comment isn't fair or true. Again, good consultants will work to make sure it belongs to the client and suits the client. Another reason you pay us.

They will undoubtedly have procedures that you don't like. I have seen one instance where the purchasing procedure stated that the Director of Purchasing initials all P.O.'s. Problem is they didn't have a Director of Purchasing, so they created the title for one person. Also, lack of ownership might lead to folks not following procedures.
Causes include: poor consulting, poor (missing??) review by client, failures on both sides. Does it happen? Yes, unfortunately. But always? NO. Please don't tar 'all consultants' with just the bad examples; I find it insulting.

I've come across some unspeakably awful and incompletent so-called 'Quality Managers', 'Quality Engineers' and the like - but I certainly don't go around tarring all QMs with the same brush. Why, oh why is it that you think it's OK to do this about consultants?

Also some consultants will want to marry your company.
A few might, but good ones won't. Neither I nor any of my colleages do. Because good ones KNOW that their services will remain in demand, there will be new companies to help and new challenges.

Most consultants (certainly good ones) consult because we seek the challenge of difference and change, and we certainly don't want to stick in the same old company. If someone's just consulting 'cos they can't find a 'real job', they may. But they're not really worthy of the name consultant anyway.

ANY consulting assignment can only work if both parties are clear about their respective parts and roles. Both parties work together - it's a team approach, using consultants as temporary skilled resources. A failure is (usually) not solely on one side!!

Finally: could we please respect each others' value and roles?

It appears Jane does not agree with my definition of consultant and contractor ( Consulting – Is it in YOUR Career Future? (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=24543)) - many of the activities she describes appear to be a hybrid of my two definitions.

I assert a "consultant" does not create documents for a client, but helps the client learn how to create its own documents. This is not to say the consultant can't act as editor to insert him[her]self in the approval chain prior to the final version being adopted for use by the organization.

I have said in my earlier post there is room in the universe for both contractor and consultant, but few organizations described as
"a MESS. Disorganized, no clear process flow. No Quality manual, no procedures (written), etc. Get the pic ?"
are likely to follow an ideal plan delivered by a contractor unless and until the contractor also helps EVERYONE in the organization learn WHY the plan should be followed and each person in the organization actually is eager and motivated to follow it. Given that such an outsider goes to that length, why not go a little more and encourage the client organization to write its own?

Thread renamed and moved to the consultants forum.I think the renaming of the thread missed the mark. In my opinion, the thrust of the OP concern had to do with using a questionable outfit to document their system and issue the certificate. That shady practice, which violates the basic precepts of integrity, is alive and well, preying on people's ignorance. Dave, I can't let this one go by, because there's so much I disagree with and some that, as a consultant, I find somewhat insulting.I might be wrong Jane, but you might have misread his post. I believe he was criticizing the practice and engagement mode that the OP was referring to. I don't believe he was generalizing the consulting profession.

I received a call from a firm that wants to help us get registered. Wants to come in, interview us, write the manual, procedures, etc, audit us internally, then externally.

Sounds like a snake-oil sales pitch to me.

The internal and external audit makes me a bit curious as well 'cause that dog don't normally hunt:nope:

:mg:Here is the issue with hiring outside help. Every company is different and operates there own way. Consultants usually focus on just getting you certified, which may or may not happen. In any case you are left with defending and ensuring your company complies with the process and procedures written in your manual. Most consultants lack the broad background to do an effective job. For example, if your consultant develops a shelf life process with the state-of-the-art software program to manage it all could you afford it? On the flip side if the process consists of forms, control points and bureaucracy could you manage the system to ensure compliance? It usually helps to do it yourself unless you get a experienced consultant with the proper back ground, which is $$$$.

Every company is different and operates there own way. Consultants usually focus on just getting you certified, which may or may not happen. SNIP. Most consultants lack the broad background to do an effective job. SNIP It usually helps to do it yourself unless you get a experienced consultant with the proper back ground, which is $$$$.I have no idea of how many consultants you have been exposed to, in the past, but these broad-brush, sweeping generalizations are simply WRONG AND MISGUIDED.

This very community here showcases, on a daily basis, excellent AND FREE advice. Their posts are testimony of their intellectual horsepower and pragmatic experience.
People like Marc, Howste, Stijloor, Jane and a few others provide incredible insight to management systems. I think your generalization is way off the mark.

People like Marc, Howste, Stijloor, Jane and a few others provide incredible insight to management systems. I think your generalization is way off the mark

Agreed:agree1:

In the case of our OP and the promise of internal and external audits made to them we may possibly be seeing the other side of the coin...not the whole coin.

Don't judge one or two by the group....

Sounds like a snake-oil sales pitch to me.

The internal and external audit makes me a bit curious as well 'cause that dog don't normally hunt:nope:Yeah - see - we haven't seen the "consultant's" written proposal - the OP, being inexperienced, may have mischaracterized what the "consultant" actually proposes to do.


:mg:Here is the issue with hiring outside help. Every company is different and operates there own way. Consultants usually focus on just getting you certified, which may or may not happen. In any case you are left with defending and ensuring your company complies with the process and procedures written in your manual. Most consultants lack the broad background to do an effective job. For example, if your consultant develops a shelf life process with the state-of-the-art software program to manage it all could you afford it? On the flip side if the process consists of forms, control points and bureaucracy could you manage the system to ensure compliance? It usually helps to do it yourself unless you get a experienced consultant with the proper back ground, which is $$$$.

I have no idea of how many consultants you have been exposed to, in the past, but these broad-brush, sweeping generalizations are simply WRONG AND MISGUIDED.

This very community here showcases, on a daily basis, excellent AND FREE advice. Their posts are testimony of their intellectual horsepower and pragmatic experience.
People like Marc, Howste, Stijloor, Jane and a few others provide incredible insight to management systems. I think your generalization is way off the mark.I tend to think like Sidney here, Amartin, you are trying to make a generalization from a limited experience point of view.

Agreed:agree1:

In the case of our OP and the promise of internal and external audits made to them we may possibly be seeing the other side of the coin...not the whole coin.

Don't judge one or two by the group....My point is similar to this - we don't have a true picture of either the OP's organization (despite his own characterization as "a MESS"), or of the consultant making a proposal, combined with folks using the word "consultant" to mean something far different from what I and other consultants like me mean when we use the word to describe our activity. As far as the coin is concerned, I can make a quarter appear to change into a nickel, then disappear. That doesn't mean I lose money that easily!

I received a call from a firm that wants to help us get registered. Wants to come in, interview us, write the manual, procedures, etc, audit us internally, then externally. I read in the threads the other day that there are some shady firms out there. Is this a good way to go ?

Definitely not this one. It's clear from what you say that they either don't know the meaning of Conflict of Interest or pay it no attention. :nope:

Also: run a mile from any canned system - you'll spot them by the fact they'll promise 'dead easy', 'no extra work', 'turnkey solution'. They aren't.

It appears Jane does not agree with my definition of consultant and contractor

In Jane's universe, there's room for more than the Wes Bucey definition of consultant.

Jane does agree that consultant and contractor are two different roles.

Consultants usually focus on just getting you certified, which may or may not happen....
Oh, balderdash. But if the client's brief is certification, sure, that's a key outcome and focus. But not to the exclusion of helping them achieve a useful, practical and sound quality system that suits them.
As to the may/may not happen... I guarantee satisfaction with my services. If the client isn't happy, I don't charge them. How many employees do I know who do that? Hmmm, none. :nope:

I could go on, but as Sidney already said, so completely wrong and misguided. How many consultants is this opinion (because that's what it is) actually based on?

Jane, I too, am a consultant. I have worked with countless organizations. And perhaps it is a just a local issue (I've only worked in the Detroit, Michigan area), but I have come up with many instances where a company hires someone to write their QMS with disastrous results. They create organizational names, departments, forms and practices that are mostly useless, but since they are part of the QMS, the company has to modify their operations to match the documentation. They end up working for the QMS, not the other way around. They have a monster they can’t feed.

With that said, I do, on occasion write the company’s documentation. I prefer them to, but sometimes they just don’t have the resources. I often provide them with templates to modify, so as to make it theirs. I try my best to have the process owners write their own documentation. By doing so, the process has complete ownership of their own stuff. And with many here (I think), my focus is on having a QMS (or even EMS) that works for the company. Do a good job there, and registration will take care of itself.

I apologize to anyone who may feel insulted by my previous post. I was not trying to paint all consultants with a broad brush, I was specifically talking about those companies that are in this for their own interests, not the interests of the client. The ones who attended the the Ferengi school of consulting. I seriously doubt there are any of those types in the Cove, because there is no profit in posting.

Sorry Dave, I obviously got hold of the wrong end of the broomstick and misunderstood!

Jane, I too, am a consultant.
Oops - silly me. I'd post a pic of me with egg on my face, but it's in use at the moment. :o

I haven't seen as many disasters as you quote - but I've seen a few, and they were as you say - just plain awful beasts. Makes me feel badly to know there are people out there who do that kind of crapola.

With that said, I do, on occasion write the company’s documentation. I prefer them to, but sometimes they just don’t have the resources.
Yes - me too. Some of it, or bits of it or occasionally most/all of it, for the reasons you say. I'm working with one organisation at the moment, coaching their various teams on how to do it, and doing quite a few myself to help out - and to provide them with some good models to draw on. (It's easier to follow examples than to start from scratch, or if you only every have seen those old-fashioned verbose Purpose/Scope/Definitions/Responsibilities yada yada ones.)

I often provide them with templates to modify, so as to make it theirs. I try my best to have the process owners write their own documentation. By doing so, the process has complete ownership of their own stuff. And with many here (I think), my focus is on having a QMS (or even EMS) that works for the company. Do a good job there, and registration will take care of itself.
Yes - yes - yes!

So - my apologies for misunderstanding you. Thanks for explaining - I'm (now) in full agreement with you. :thanx:

:topic:
Who or what is "the Ferengi school of consulting"? (the meaning's clear - I just missed the reference).

No need to apologize, Jane. I can see where you were coming from. Who or what is "the Ferengi school of consulting"?
The Ferengi is a race on a program call Star Trek. They live for profit and all of their laws (Rules of Acquisition) and societal rules are based on acquiring profit.

a program call Star Trek.

Ah hah. OK, Ok (sound of light dawning)...we have even heard of this - and it is even shown- way down here in Australia!! :lol:

Nice term though - I like it. ;) May even have to steal it. (Wonder why Google didn't know the word though)

Yours
Not-a-dyed-in-the-wool-Trekkie-downunder
(but you'd guessed I'm sure)

No need to apologize, Jane. I can see where you were coming from.
The Ferengi is a race on a program call Star Trek. They live for profit and all of their laws (Rules of Acquisition) and societal rules are based on acquiring profit.

And they're butt ugly, too........:lmao: unlike most consultants......:yes::notme:

From the Ferengi School of Consulting

87th rule of acquisition. "Learn the customer's weaknesses so you can better take advantage of him":lol:

Thanks guys for introducing me to the Ferengi and the Ferengi school of Consulting! :applause:

This time a Google search turned up a treasure trove. Including some of the following rules (which seem very apposite in this case) both official and unofficial:


The best deal is the one that brings the most profit. (The 34th Rule)
Money is everything.
Satisfaction is not guaranteed.
The flimsier the product, the higher the price.
Not even dishonesty can tarnish the shine of profit.
A wife is a luxury... a smart accountant a necessity.
A wealthy man can afford anything except a conscience.

I think everyone has given a pretty good idea for you.

Whether you decide to get a consultant to help you, I would still highly recommend that you seek training for yourself. The consultant can help you to jump start your program, but that's just the beginning. What's going to be more important is the maintenance and the growth of your program. If you leave the entire program to the consultant (with minimal or no involvement), you will learn later on that perhaps that's not the best thing to do. In other words, get involved from day 1.

Good luck!

I think everyone has given a pretty good idea for you.

Whether you decide to get a consultant to help you, I would still highly recommend that you seek training for yourself. The consultant can help you to jump start your program, but that's just the beginning. What's going to be more important is the maintenance and the growth of your program. If you leave the entire program to the consultant (with minimal or no involvement), you will learn later on that perhaps that's not the best thing to do. In other words, get involved from day 1.

Good luck!
I agree. You need to be invloved in all that is done. You can't just get a consultant and expect to have a program you can defend. And beleive me you will have to defend at some point. Also if you don't know the program you can't implement it.