Observing over the last few years the changes that have taken place in the company I work for, the new version of ISO and its changes, I have noticed that there seems to be two distinct sides:

1. Tool - the one who sees the quality system as a means and really wants to do a good job. The procedures, systems, processes, all documented, give them the tools for seeking ways of improvement on their own. (I have a lot of these and am always getting requests for review of changes and document revisions).

2. Weapon - the one who sees ISO as the enemy since it is ISO that is making them do all this work (which, by the way, they are getting paid to do and should be doing anyway as a matter of good business practice. I think it is just the fact that there is a 'procedure' now that they perceive 'tells' them what to do they resist - I have too many of these unfortunately). These are the ones who use ISO as a weapon. For example: 'Show me where ISO says I have to do that!' Usually it is not ISO, in fact it should never be ISO. It should be the Quality System - internally created. (I perceive this attitude as a direct show of disrespect, but that may just be me).

Of course there are many other categories and sub-categories. But these two types seem to stand out.

Alienyst,
The poll is IMO, is too black and white. May I suggest you add the definition of Both?
Wallace.

Well, I did, but it is in the post. I chalk it up to 'learning curve' and apologize. Being the first poll I created the process was new to me. Although well documented, my training was obviously inadequate and I should take this up with someone. I am just not sure who. But improvement is forthcoming.

NOTE: I saw no way to edit the poll. I missed something? But based on experience (taking polls before I posted one) you can read the post before voting.

No need to appologise.
Your thread starter is a great post, I'm sure it shall generate many hits.
Alienyst, welcome to the cove.
Peace out.
Wallace.

Let me know if someone of the first 4 votes wants to change to 'Both'.

Over here the we lean more and more towards the tool side. These days I really feel that the system is alive and well. That was not the case when I first came here. We are still learning.

/Claes

Voting for both, I think I need to explain.
It's seems to be a Tool for production and marketing as they are really with their hands in the engine to make it work, and they can see the improvement for them.
And it is seen as a Weapon by a part of managment.

We consider it as a tool......ISO9001:2000 has helped us to get our house, so to say, in order and improved our ratings with our customers. It has increased our employability, therefore jobs are more secure.

Tool.

And it helps us to reduce our paper purchasing quantities.

Who added 'both' to the poll? Kind of defeats my question - by majority! Is this a regular occurrence here?

When I first started at this facility 3 years ago it was definitely a weapon. Whether started by their previous consultant or by the gal that was forced to take on the 'management rep' role, I was inundated by the following:

- ISO says we gotta do this....
- Do you have a copy of that ISO form (i.e. any form used in the business)...
- This is Rob, he's the ISO guy...
- this ISO stuff is a necessary evil...
- Do we still have to do this [activity] cuz of ISO?

After 3 long years of gruelling "re-programming" I can now happily say most see it as a tool.

As a former ISO Coordinator turned Quality Director it is a constant fight to keep ISO from becoming a weapon of choice. I think that many orginizations have turn to ISO as a weapon.

We are not yet certified but thus far, I can say that ISO has been an improvement tool for our organization. That may change at a later date but for now it is a tool. :)

ISO 9001:2000 is a tool of our Business Management System. It is not the be all and end all of what we do. We do not do something for the sake of ISO...we do something because it is what we do.

Our BMS is communicated via a Business Technology Handbook. This book is broken down into 8 main sections:


Company - background information on locations, capcities, product mixes, history, etc.
Leadership - SDCA, PDCA, politices, ethics, vision, mission, Stakeholders and meeting their needs, the CI concept, quality awards and recognition, etc.
Planning - SDCA and PDCA in more detail, scenarios, long-term planning, strengths and weaknesses, market analysis, economic goals, etc.
Customer and Community - focus, positioning matrix, social responsibility, etc.
Information and Knowledge - benchmarking, balanced scorecard, support systems, etc.
People - cell structure, training, goals, 5S, teamwork, recognition system, safety, competence, etc.
Processes - ISO 9001, management through processes, standards, maintenance levels, etc.
Methods and Tools - problem-solving methodology, six sigma, quality tools, planning tools, etc.


Even if my location was not registered to ISO 9001:2000, we would still have a Business Management System. ISO 9001 provides us with the system to help formalize and control our Business Management System. There are locations within our organization that are not registered to ISO 9001 and they follow the same BMS as us, however, even they admit it is not quite as controlled and accepted by employees as it is within our location.

ISO 9001:2000 is a tool of our Business Management System. It is not the be all and end all of what we do. We do not do something for the sake of ISO...we do something because it is what we do.

Even if my location was not registered to ISO 9001:2000, we would still have a Business Management System. ISO 9001 provides us with the system to help formalize and control our Business Management System. There are locations within our organization that are not registered to ISO 9001 and they follow the same BMS as us, however, even they admit it is not quite as controlled and accepted by employees as it is within our location.

Roxane,

Once again an excellent reply. :applause:
Greg B

We do not do something for the sake of ISO...we do something because it is what we do.



Rox,

Can you say for sure that there is nothing in your QMS/BMS that you do only because ISO requires it? Just askin'... :tg:

Can you say for sure that there is nothing in your QMS/BMS that you do only because ISO requires it? Just askin'... :tg:

Process-wise, I can't really think of anything at the moment. Maybe, once upon a time, we did it because of ISO, but now we do it because it makes sense. Truth be told, Management Review is not necessarily a part of our organization's Business Management Technology, however, PDCA is and this includes analyzing the data, communicating the results, etc. according to our methodologies.

Paperwork, well, I would gather that the Quality Manual is there "because of ISO"...but we do also have a Business Management Technology handbook to help guide on our tools, systems, etc. (kinda like of QM, isn't it?).

Perhaps, before I joined this organization, when ISO was first being implemented, things were done "because of ISO"...but nowadays, with the evolution and maturity of our system, when you talk with our people who use the system, you don't hear "because of ISO", you hear "it's what we do" or "it's part of the process".

:topic: Roxane,
From what you're saying here, your organization has achieved an excellent culture shift that may be exemplary. Your methods of training would interest me.
I just gotta come and visit your facility some time Rox.
Wallace.

Roxane,
From what you're saying here, your organization has achieved an excellent culture shift that may be exemplary. Your methods of training would interest me.
I just gotta come and visit your facility some time Rox.
Wallace.

:topic:

:mybad: In all of my running around of late, Wallace, I completely forgot about your visit (or rather the planning of it)! Sorry!

Ummm...how's February 2006 looking for you? :o My April and May are pretty much written off with training and audits. I know I'm supposed to head down to Atlanta in mid-June, too. However, after that time, my calendar starts to open up a bit (for now). How's your summer looking?...wanna hang out in a melt shop in the summer? :D

:topic:

July looks good to me Roxane. Ok with you?

Wallace.

Maybe, once upon a time, we did it because of ISO, but now we do it because it makes sense.
Precisely. This is what I try to emphasize. "Because it makes sense" to me = "Basic good business practices".

Precisely. This is what I try to emphasize. "Because it makes sense" to me = "Basic good business practices".

And that's what I was trying to communicate to a recent visitor to the Cove who seemed more inclined to disrespecting ISO than listening to those of us who consider ourselves to be 'success stories.'

I still smile at my recent inner revelations regarding my evolution from a because-of-ISO-kinda-girl to an advocate of systems and processes and improvement.

For our new teammates, I'm the tourguide who introduces them to our Management Technology. For our existing teammates, I'm the information desk. But for all, I'm the champion of the system (to paraphrase a somewhat well-known North American commerical..."I'm not just a user, I'm the Champion"). Every one of our locations has someone in my capacity and we're called Change Agents. We're in one of the most high-profile positions within the organization. When a new process is about to incorporated or modified, odds are you'll find us guiding the way (not always leading...more like facilitating).

In the end, it's great to see how involved our people get when actions need to be taken. This morning, I had a visitor from a sister plant who shipped us, in our opinion, bad material. Sales disagreed and sided with the sister plant. Customer complained and our plant was hit with it. My visitor is in a position to do something about this. During the tour today, a couple of the workers in that area came up and started offerring possible (and professional) solutions. No finger pointing. No blame laying. Just wanting to work together to resolve the situation...how's that for giving you a warm and fuzzy?

We're not perfect...I don't think we ever will be...but we do try to raise the bar when it comes to meeting requirements, ensuring security and profitability, and allowing our Family to grow (both personally and professionally).

July looks good to me Roxane. Ok with you?

For now, yes, but I do know we have MS shutdown in July for two weeks and RM shutdown in August for one week. Shall we move this conversation to the Coffee Break forum to discuss there, rather than clutter up this thread?

Shall we move this conversation to the Coffee Break forum to discuss there, rather than clutter up this thread?
Different topic - New or related thread, please.

There is no doubt about it that ISO is a BMS from the get-go. But many companies get the attitude that it is a hammer and to a hammer everything looks like a nail.

It is documented and if it is not done this way your out or you get a warning. Two places tried this and it had to be stopped. The question should be is there something wrong with the System? A lawyer friend of mine once said "Once you document it, someone will have you!" I am surprised that more did not say weapon. Which it should not be.

I started with this company a little over 1 year ago and ISO was used as a weapon in the past. People were terrified when I mentioned the word audit. :eek: I eventually prepared a powerpoint presentation which outlined what would and would not occur during the course of the audit and made it a mandatory training for all employees. It seemed to ease fears a little but everyone did not relax and embrace the process until they saw that my goal was to help improve the organization not point fingers or place blame. :) Now ISO is becoming the tool that it was meant to be. Employee involvement is improving and the lines of communication are open. It is far from perfect but things are changing for the better. :cool:

Now ISO is becoming the tool that it was meant to be. Employee involvement is improving and the lines of communication are open. It is far from perfect but things are changing for the better.

Great success story! Always nice to hear when things go well! :applause:

The first time I participated in an ISO (actually QS9000) implementation, one of the trainers described the '20-60-20' rule where 20% of the workforce will embrace it and work hard for it, 20% will fight it tooth and nail, and the remaining 60% will sit on the fence with one moistened finger in the air testing the wind. My experiences since then have completely validated that statement. The 20% who favor it will view it as a tool. the 20% opposed will fear it as a weapon. The other 60% will sit there with a blank stare until they get a sense that one faction or the other will prevail and then adopt the viewpoint of the winning side. The overwhelming factor that will determine who that will be IMHO is whether top management fully supports the implementation and maintenence of a robust QMS. I have seen two such efforts completely founder, wither, and die due to the lack of that support.

The first time I participated in an ISO (actually QS9000) implementation, one of the trainers described the '20-60-20' rule where 20% of the workforce will embrace it and work hard for it, 20% will fight it tooth and nail, and the remaining 60% will sit on the fence with one moistened finger in the air testing the wind. My experiences since then have completely validated that statement. The 20% who favor it will view it as a tool. the 20% opposed will fear it as a weapon. The other 60% will sit there with a blank stare until they get a sense that one faction or the other will prevail and then adopt the viewpoint of the winning side. The overwhelming factor that will determine who that will be IMHO is whether top management fully supports the implementation and maintenence of a robust QMS. I have seen two such efforts completely founder, wither, and die due to the lack of that support.

I have heard this rule.

Personally I think it's nonsense with most training and it's just an instructor's excuse when management feels not enough people bought into a program, or it's a management passing off the blame on to the people for their poor committment.

Culture change ain't easy but with the proper support and good instructors my experience shows far better that 20-60-20.
20-60-20 may be valid after the introductory session, but I see more along the lines of 50-40-10 after a few more informative sessions and setting up teams for acitve participation at all levels. And then that 40 will move over to the 50 side, with the typical negative personality types staying below the 10% mark.

one of the trainers described the '20-60-20' rule where 20% of the workforce will embrace it and work hard for it, 20% will fight it tooth and nail, and the remaining 60% will sit on the fence with one moistened finger in the air testing the wind.

This must have its origin from Pareto's principle, the 80-20 rule. Yes, there are always the 20% laggards or whatever you called them and they often choose to look at things the negative way. Only culture change and time (taken for the system to prove itself) can change these people. What ever it is, internally, ISO is a management tool. Negative perceptions can be managed and changed over time.

Externally, ISO is a weapon - A weapon of competition. Of the many organizations certified, how many had a working system, how many had systems that enhance their business/output? It's the job of management to deploy and make good use of all their weapons (management tools) to ensure survival or leadership positions in their respective business sector.