QualityPhD said:
Wes,
Not to burst the bubble here, but I am eagerly awaiting these non-scientific results. Several questions do not "fit" in the category of PJR reputation perception.
When designing a survey, one needs to include only the questions that will effective gauge to recipients response to a targeted query. It appears there are two issues here:
1. PJR's reputation, and;
2. Trust in the effectiveness of the quality management system of an organization audited by PJR.
These are divergent topics - IMHO
My earlier posts were not an attack on you QualityPhD. Regardless of what your knight in slightly rusty armor may think.
I think there is a slim chance that PJR can become a viable auto sector QMS registrar, but it will not be easy. And the IAOB will not make it easy, I bet.
The perception of an organization can be changed. It is easier to change perception of current customers than it is to change former or perspective customers. Obviously there is an "aroma" problem with PJR.
And it is clear that PJR is attempting to salvage market share and its registration business through, as I think you are saying, auditor consistency and achievement of TS 16949 accreditation. If accreditaion is attained, this will go a long way in salvaging a reputation as a reasonable CB. A name change may be helpful as well.
"Trust in the effectiveness of the quality management system of an organization audited by PJR" is only going to happen one customer at a time and/or through TS accreditation.
I wish you luck, but if unsuccessful, there are a number of other TS CBs that chomping at the bit to service your QMS customers.