Hi every one!
I know I am REALLY going to get hammered on this thread by a lot of you that work in the manufacturing industry, but it's a question I've been wanting to ask for a while now. My question is this: Is ISO certification worth the hassel to a mid sized service oriented organization? Why is it so important to attach a lable to one's quality management system? I know that ISO is a universal standard and that being certified implies that a company adheres to certain quality standards, which is needed for organizations that are large, multinational, or have multiple locations. I do see the need for ISO (or similar) standards in those cases. However, my question pertains to the domestic mid sized organization that has a fairly specific customer base. Why do ISO certification? Wouldn't a quality system of a different type be just as effective if planned and implemented properly? People have told me that because an organization has to go through a certification process, they are more likely to follow it because of the cost of training employees and implimenting the system. But couldn't a company conceivably throw the standards "out the window" once they have aceived certification and still put the ISO lable on their letterhed?
I work in the commercial printing industry where quality is a huge issue. I have looked at ISO and so has the top management at my company and they have decided not to go down that road due to the cost and the perceived limited benifits of implimenting such a system. Once again, I DO see the need for ISO certification in certain manufacturing areas, but, is it really worth it or very useful in other areas of business? I think it has been hyped up as the be-all-end -all to solving quality problems in every area of business, and all I am saying is that maybe it isn't. I would appreciate your comments. I'm here to learn and get other people's thoughts on certain opinions that I have. If my opinion is totally off- base, please let me know, that's how we all learn, new things.

Once again, be gentle! :o

I cannot say if it is worth the cost. But I received, just this week, a letter from a medical clinic claiming to be the largest in the US with an ISO certification. They just received certification. The group is 47 physicians employing 250 staff. According to the letter they expect to ".... improve service delivery and control of documents; and provide constant monitoring of all procedures to ensure that customer needs are being met." In the letter they say they have already experienced improvement in their billing and collection processes. Hey, I am just reporting what they say. I have heard of small single medical and dental practices being ISO certified but this is the largest medical group.

Hi every one!
I know I am REALLY going to get hammered on this thread by a lot of you that work in the manufacturing industry, but it's a question I've been wanting to ask for a while now. My question is this: Is ISO certification worth the hassel to a mid sized service oriented organization? Why is it so important to attach a lable to one's quality management system? I know that ISO is a universal standard and that being certified implies that a company adheres to certain quality standards, which is needed for organizations that are large, multinational, or have multiple locations. I do see the need for ISO (or similar) standards in those cases. However, my question pertains to the domestic mid sized organization that has a fairly specific customer base. Why do ISO certification? Wouldn't a quality system of a different type be just as effective if planned and implemented properly? People have told me that because an organization has to go through a certification process, they are more likely to follow it because of the cost of training employees and implimenting the system. But couldn't a company conceivably throw the standards "out the window" once they have aceived certification and still put the ISO lable on their letterhed?
I work in the commercial printing industry where quality is a huge issue. I have looked at ISO and so has the top management at my company and they have decided not to go down that road due to the cost and the perceived limited benifits of implimenting such a system. Once again, I DO see the need for ISO certification in certain manufacturing areas, but, is it really worth it or very useful in other areas of business? I think it has been hyped up as the be-all-end -all to solving quality problems in every area of business, and all I am saying is that maybe it isn't. I would appreciate your comments. I'm here to learn and get other people's thoughts on certain opinions that I have. If my opinion is totally off- base, please let me know, that's how we all learn, new things.

Once again, be gentle! :oHow gentle is this?
NO organization NEEDS to pay a Registrar for registration to any Standard, UNLESS a customer requires registration as a condition of doing business AND the organization to be registered wants to keep that customer.

That said, there is a strong economic case to be made for ANY organization to make itself COMPLIANT with a Standard applicable to its industry as a way of keeping itself in tune with the best practices of its industry.

If you do not understand the difference between REGISTRATION and COMPLIANCE, please start a new thread.
Note:
In common usage in the United States, we normally speak of "Registration" to a Standard. Registration is accompanied by a "Certificate of Registration" from a Registrar. Simply stated, "Certification" and "Registration" are used interchangeably, but "Certification" implies a stamp of approval much stronger than mere testimony to the fact an organization meets the minimum requirements of Registration; it implies the goods and services of the organization meet minimum criteria.

For example, when the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) certify an organization, they are, in fact, lending their approval to the organization; that the goods and services are safe for consumers.

That said, there is a strong economic case to be made for ANY organization to make itself COMPLIANT with a Standard applicable to its industry as a way of keeping itself in tune with the best practices of its industry.

If you do not understand the difference between REGISTRATION and COMPLIANCE, please start a new thread.And there is my question Wes! Is ISO THE the best quality management system for every industry? As I stated in my original post, it seems to me that ISO has been touted as the be all end all to everyone's quality issues. All I am saying is that maybe it's not.

I don't believe you need to register, but using a standard allows you to organize your system accordingly. Also, you should be able to measure your improvement after implementation. So you need to decide what you want to improve. The improvements should be measured in $$.

I'm with Wes. . .

Developing a QMS that works for you, DOES provide for satisfying customer requirements, allows you at grow and improve, and allows you to make a profit doesn't need a certification to say you do it.

IF however, you are looking to move into a new sector that does look at the certification as a requiremnent, then it is academic.

Perhaps your senior management have decided to stay in the niche you have carved out for yourselves. There is nothing wrong with that. :applause:

And there is my question Wes! Is ISO THE the best quality management system for every industry? As I stated in my original post, it seems to me that ISO has been touted as the be all end all to everyone's quality issues. All I am saying is that maybe it's not.That's a completely different question than
Is ISO certification worth the hassel to a mid sized service oriented organization? Why is it so important to attach a lable to one's quality management system?My point is/was if there is no coercion to be REGISTERED, there is no compelling reason to have anything to do with ISO. An organization is always free to follow its own desire, absent outside influence.

The economic value of being compliant to ISO or any other Standard is that you take away the cost and aggravation of re-inventing the wheel and are able to take advantage of the best efforts of a coalition of experts from across the world in setting up a comprehensive, consistent system of managing the quality practices within a variety of organizations, big and small, in a multitude of business and nonprofit fields.

Using a Standard as a benchmark makes it easy for an organization to use gap analysis to determine what it needs to bring its system up to the best practices used by world class organizations around the world.

Using a simple analogy: When doing business in the United States, you could use Latin as the official language in which you keep all your records, but then you would have to keep and maintain a special dictionary (can you say "cost?") for the definitions of words special to your industry. If you were in medicine, for example, how would you translate Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)? How would you train personnel to use your system? What costs saved in not following a Standard (American English) would be swallowed up in training new hires to work in Latin?

Similarly, you could keep the books of your business on the backs of old envelopes, but it might present some extra costs in dealing with the IRS at tax time.

Bottom line:
I guess you have to persuade me that an idiosyncratic system dreamed up by an organization is more cost-effective and useful than a Standard, rather than me persuading you that the opposite is true.

Any good (ocmpetent, reasonable etc) company will have ways (systems, procedures) of doing things. Accounts, shipping, contract review etc.

The may call them differently to what a STANDARD does. Hence the word 'standard'.

Th epoor performing company does not have any systems and are therefore a complete shambles to deal with.

If we were not required to have ISO certification then we would save the money.

I have worked for a number of very good performing companies that have not been certified. But they were forced buy customer pressure to have the certificates. Hence my involvement.

You pays your money......................

But couldn't a company conceivably throw the standards "out the window" once they have aceived certification and still put the ISO lable on their letterhed?

I agree with the other posts on the value of ISO. The one thing you would not be able to do is use the ISO label on your letterhead and advertising. The ISO registration is trademarked and you would be legally prohibited from using ISO that way. When you become registered, the registrar provides guidelines on how the ISO registration can be used in advertising. If you decide to drop your registration then you also agree to discontinue the use of the ISO label. Another misuse of the ISO label is saying that the registration is for a product. The registration is the acknowledgement that you have a management system that complies with the ISO standards.

I have to say by experience that, organizations deciding to either use or not use the organizational management structure of the ISO 9001 standard, do so for two main reasons.
(1) Cost of conformance = profit gain
(2) Cost of conformance = profit constraints

If indeed an organization decides to use the management structure of ISO 9001 and, further decides to merely use and not certify and register their management system tend to be more open to other available tools and techniques for continuous improvements.

The organization which decides to go the full hog and get into the main stream of ISO 9001 regisration and certification process, tends to be more structured and regimented regarding viewing other available tools and techniques for continuous improvement.

There shall be many at the Cove who wil vigorously defend and advance the use of the ISO 9001 standard and likewise, those such as I, who will show indifference to the current offreing from the IOS.

Your choice of using or registering and certifying may merely be an economical decision rather than a concerted and focused commitment to continually measuring and improving your organizational system. Keeping in mind, your business is in existence to make money based on the needs and wants of customer demands.
Wallace.

Thank you everyone for your thoughts and comments. I think you have all pretty much affirmed that ISO training is worth the cost whether registration is a goal or not. Maybe I should beat my head against the brick wall that is top management :frust: and at least try to get some degree of training in this area.

Thanks again :thanx:

hawkeye:

what is your position in this print shop? do I read you correctly that it is a print shop? What sort of presses do you use, and what is the size of the company?

I have assisted installation of printing presses in the midwest and I'm somewhat familiar with the workings of a printing house. I am not sure if you work in support or production within the printing industry.

A print shop would be a fantastic place to implement the ISO 9000 series quality management system.

You will find that you will waste money, and spend money. (bear with me.) Wasted money goes with wasted time. ISO 9000 is not respected by people in general. Neither is management. Therefore, if you give someone a project to complete for ISO 9000, chances are they will not feel excited and bubbling with ideas.

If you get past that part and begin to use ISO 9000, you will SPEND money. You will find that many people in the organization are being listened to, and that they have a lot of ideas about how to streamline and improve the process. This doesn't always have to cost money, but most of the things that are wrong about a business that should be right will cost money to fix.

You can have ISO for free, provided you wish to learn about it and construct the system in your own free time. Once you have the system, you will only need to spend a little money in time to implement it. Now that you are using ISO 9000, you will be using it to do the right thing and fix problems that are causing waste, to develop a stronger culture of professional organizational development.

hawkeye, it is very difficult to break the misunderstanding that ISO 9000 is a product. ISO 9000 is about $50 I think. It comes with no real guidance, no explanation, no training, no promise. It's just a list that describes something.

You can't pay ISO 9000. You can throw a ton of money at it and maybe it will take root and grow, and you will see some investment returns. At that point, you would probably love to find ANY returns or anything at all that it has done for you.

In fact, I'll get you started for FREE. Identify the key processes of your organization, brainstorm and do some thinking from above. look down on the organization and see how it is built. What are the inputs and outputs of your whole organization, for starters? What are the key processes internally needed to achieve the output with what input, and what are the inputs and outputs of these KEY processes?

Determine the sequence and interaction of these processes. Determine their application throughout the company. Look at your organization from the process standpoint I just described, and be able to understand the company as a process as a whole, and as a collection of KEY processes

How do you ensure the availability of resources and information necessary to support these processes?

How do you monitor, measure, and analyze these processes? How do you provide resources and information necessary to monitor, measure, and analyze these processes?

You should implement the actions necessary to achieved your planned results, and to continually improve these processes. They are: your business process as a whole, the quality of what your company does. Your key processes, the way your company does it.

The ISO 9000 series quality management system can do this. There may be others, true.

First of all, the only way any organization can truly measure the value of ISO registration is via the top line (revenues), not the bottom line (profits). Here's why: The ISO 9000 standard of requirements is just a framework that anyone can buy and implement as little or as much of as they wish. The framework is, by and large, a very good model to follow if you wish to produce high quality goods and services. The point being that anyone can do it if they so choose and reap the benefits of increased customer satisfaction which lead to increased revenues and profits. Only those companies that have customers who required ISO compliance can truly measure the value of ISO in the form of lost customers and revenues if they choose not to persue or to be evaluated to receive registration.

The analogy I like to use is if I want to learn some new material like Marketing so that I could change jobs. I could go to a school and pay $$$ and receive a passing grade or I could go online for free or buy a couple of used text books and learn the same material on my own for very little money. In order to do the later, I just need an element of discipline to be successful. If my current or future employer required me to have a degree or see a transcript from a univeristy (i.e. registration) I would have no other choice but to go to school. But if my employer only required that I have the knowledge, then the option of me not going to school would be feasible as long as I had the discipline to follow through. And there in lies the key issue for most organizations and people, they don't have the discipline to do the things that they know they need to do, and usually require an outside force to move them in the direction they know they should go, even when the interaction of such a force it isn't required.

So to answer your question, no your organization doesn't need ISO registration, just the knowledge of the framework and how to best implement it, both of which can be gotten for little money.

[QUOTE=atetsade]hawkeye:

what is your position in this print shop? do I read you correctly that it is a print shop? What sort of presses do you use, and what is the size of the company?

atetsade,
Yes, I work in a print shop in the pre press area. I used to do a little proofreading and color management, such as monitoring the color variations of a press run to ensure the color stayed within acceptable standards. I also would check customer samples before they went out the door to make sure they looked good. Also, I proofread plates before they went to the pressroom. I did that for about five years, and now management wants me to work on implementing some type of quality control system which means that I now have to deal with the finishing departments, shipping, customer service, etc... I'm just searching for info on how to best go about this. Management really doesn't want to spend much money on this and they don't want the workers spending a bunch of time in meetings. We did the whole consultant thing about 7 or 8 years ago (before I was employed here) and implimented a Total quality management system that eventually devolved into committees complaining that they didn't have refrigerators in their department! So, naturally, management is a little gun shy about implimenting a new system. Personally, I feel TQM failed here because of lack of support from management. So, now that management is ready to venture back into the realm of actually having controls in place to ensure they output a good product, I need to tread VERY lightly to try and get a few things in place. That is why I'm asking all of these questions, to find if I should recommend a system like this, or work with the CEO & plant manager to come up with our own system.

Thanks for the help.

Hawkeye,
You may gain a bigger picture view to the potential of an established BMS at your location if you take a look at an overview of assessing a system at http://www.elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=7678
Have a look at the attachments located at post #1 and post # 15.
Taking a look at an overview rather than being overwhelmed with the complexity of establishing a BMS at this time, may benefit your current knowledge and potential involvement.
Wallace.

Thanks Wallace, I appreciate it :D

hawkeye,
If you cant read the attachments due to restrictions, Private message me with your E-mail address and, I'll send you the attchments for reading at your leisure.
Wallace. :D

If indeed an organization decides to use the management structure of ISO 9001 and, further decides to merely use and not certify and register their management system tend to be more open to other available tools and techniques for continuous improvements.

The organization which decides to go the full hog and get into the main stream of ISO 9001 regisration and certification process, tends to be more structured and regimented regarding viewing other available tools and techniques for continuous improvement.
Wallace:

I'm not sure I understand this. I don't think that ISO 9001 and continuous improvement tools are mutually exclusive. I believe continuous improvement techniques such as QFD, Poke Yoke and Lean, to name a few, are an adjunct to ISO 9001. Iso 9001 is a system for organizing a business and not the technique to accomplish continuous improvement. Unfortunately "Quality" has remained in the title. It should be replaced by "Business". Some "Old School" managers associate Quality with cost which we as Quality professionals know that with the proper implementation is quite the contrary.

I don't think that ISO 9001 and continuous improvement tools are mutually exclusive. I believe continuous improvement techniques such as QFD, Poke Yoke and Lean, to name a few, are an adjunct to ISO 9001. Iso 9001 is a system for organizing a business and not the technique to accomplish continuous improvement. Unfortunately "Quality" has remained in the title. It should be replaced by "Business". Some "Old School" managers associate Quality with cost which we as Quality professionals know that with the proper implementation is quite the contrary.

I believe I'm trying to view the system as a whole, when I make such comments.
Creating a BMS is the easy part Al. the difficult part is implimenting it organizationally. ISO 9001 as a business standard is IMO, a good starting point. The many tools and techniques that are available to facilitate process change and improvement must be viewed as being part of the whole, if and when accepted and used. When you say that, "QFD, Poke Yoke and Lean, to name a few, are an adjunct to ISO 9001", I would disagree. I believe, as a system thinker that, an established BMS (ISO or non ISO) would be best viewed and used as a whole system. The many available tools and techniques used within a BMS are what make up the characteristics of that individual wholistic system. One size doesn't fit all as mark's footnote says.
Cheers
Wallace.

Hawkeye,
Attached are a few documents that I authored and used in a past quality position.
They may be of interest and use in your BMS endeavours.
Wallace

Hawkeye,

I may repeat some of the excellent information that the other people have offered on this topic, but here's my $0.02 worth as well.

The organization I am working with - also a service organization but in a different line of business, but that doesn't matter - started improving all aspects of their service about seven years ago. After about three years they decided to become registered to ISO 9001 for a couple of reasons. First, to validate the improvements to the rest of the company that we are a very tiny part of, and to recognize the achievements of the team. Second, to establish a framework to lock in the improvements and provide a foundation for further improvement and goal-setting. Now, it is not "the ISO thing" - it's simply the way we do things here.

The ISO 9000 system can serve several purposes for an organization, without even considering formal registration.

It is an internationally recognized and accepted model or framework of the minimum essential elements of an effective business management system. Being generic, it can be applied to any size organization in any line of business.
It serves as a solid foundation for the organization by assuring that you say what you do, you do what you say you do, you have records to prove it, top managment reviews all parts of the business regularly and those reviews are documented, you have an effective process for continual improvement, and you have an effective process for handling problems.
It locks in improvements so that new level of performance becomes the new foundation. For example, imagine the Deming continual improvement circle as a wheel moving up a ramp -- the ISO 9000 management system is a wedge that slips in behind the wheel as it turns in order to hold the gains and prevent rolling backwards.
It provides a common language of business managment that is known and understood globally.
Important point: a business does not necessarily have to change anything they are currnetly doing. They do have to examine the requirements of the standard, document how current practices meet those requirements, and take action to cover any gaps in the conformance. The completed documentation of how the business practices meet the requirements of the standard is usually called a "quality manual" but it can be called something else - a "business practices manual" for example.

Obtaining registration of your conformance to the standard is a public validation that the business managment system meets internationally accepted standards. It is also a public recognition of the achievment of the team - hopefully the entire organization. It also opens new doors.

I assume that a goal of the business is to grow and expand beyond the current customer base. (After all, to do otherwise is to stagnate and eventually die.) Keep thse points in mind:

Many organizations that are registered tend to give preference to suppliers who are registered to ISO 9001.
A significant number of organizations require their suppliers to be registered to the standard - or to one very similar. You will find the "very similar" if you ever have a customer who is an automotive, telecommunications or aerospace manufacturer, for example.
A lot of local, state and Federal government agencies either require or prefer suppliers to be registered.
When your business starts dealing with international customers, registration is the entry ticket - without that, you generally don't get to play. "International" includes Canada and Mexico as well as everyone else. There are more countries that have adopted ISO 9000 than there are who are members of the United Nations.
When (not "if") you get a potential customer that requires registration as a condition of doing business, you avoid the "panic mode" if you already are.
Currently in the United States, companies in many industries can differentiate themselves as a market leader by being registered. It would not surprise me if a few years from now the perception is that an organization which is not registered is falling behind in the market and failing to meet minimum customer expectations.
Top management listens to the language of money. (Juran discovered that in the 1920's and it's still true today.) If the buiness is set up and running well there may be very little work needed to document conformance to the standard. A "gap analysis" will tell you that. I do suggest getting a consultant to help with that, preferably one with some familiarity with the type of business and who will do a tough "pre-registration audit". That will cost a bit. Then there is the registration; there are a number of discussions here in The Cove on choosing a registrar. Again, it helps if they - or specifically the auditors they assign -- are familiar with your industry.

In the case of the organization I am working with, the cost of the consultant and and registration was trivial - compared to the work that had been done over the previous five years, virtually all of which was done without any thought to ISO 9000. Likewise, the cost of maintaining registration is trivial compared to the productivity and quality gains from the documented business management system. (And this is all in an industry where quality and safety are already an extremely high priority!)

Is it worth it? In my opinion, YES!

Hawkeye,

From the sound of this message, it looks like you are in a no win situation. Your management is looking for 'some type of Quality Control system'.
This tells me that they have no concept of Quality as we know it today. Unless they can be made to understand the value of a Quality Management System, it won't matter if you choose the ISO system or the ABC system, nothing will be successful.
Company's that still refer to Quality Control as the method for ensuring customer satisfaction are living in the Dark Ages. They typically decree that 'something needs to be done' so they go looking for someone in the orgainzation to give the job to.
Here they have found you. You have experience in some of the business aspects but not all. I suspect that you also need a lot of education on contemporary quality methods. Management is not will to invest much money. So you won't get much of a raise and not much money for education.
They have already told you that they don't want a lot of committees. OK, but setting up any quality system is going to take time and requires their DEEP COMMITMENT AND INVOLVEMENT. They don't get off scott free. They have to work at this. So you will have TEAMS.
ISO is a great framework for a quality system (forget the registration part) if you are committed, if not don't waste the time and effort.

Gerry