|
Elsmar Cove Forum Sidebar
|
|
|
|
Monitor the Elsmar Forum
|
| Monitor New Forum Posts
|
|
Follow Marc & Elsmar
|
|
|
Elsmar Cove Groups
|
|
|
Sponsor Links
|
|
|
|
|
|
Donate and $ Contributor Forum Access
|
 |
|
Sponsored Links
|
|
|
|
Courtesy Quick Links
|
 Links that Elsmar Cove visitors will find useful in your quest for knowledge:
Howard's International Quality Services
Atul's Symphony Technologies
Marcelo Antunes' SQR Consulting
Bob Doering's Correct SPC - Precision Machining
NIST's Engineering Statistics Handbook
IRCA - International Register of Certified Auditors
SAE - Society of Automotive Engineers
Quality Digest Portal
IEST - Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology
ASQ - American Society for Quality
|
|
 |
|

18th October 2005, 03:20 PM
|
 |
Involved - Posts
Registration Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ft. Wayne, Indiana, US
Age: 44
|
|
Posts: 29
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Karma Power: 35 Karma: 10 
|
|
Am I overthinking this or... Should my Registrar be ISO9001 certified
should my Registrar be ISO certified?
Preparing for reassessment in a few weeks and while reviewing my Purchasing processes and my Approved Supplier List, realized that my Registrar is NOT on my ASL. Now, I know they should be and I will update to include them. My procedure states that Suppliers that have a direct affect on the QMS are to be ISO registered. In the case that they are not self assessment takes place then... you all know the drill.
I'll hand it over to the experts and thanks in advance.
Adriane
__________________
"Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, the lesson afterwards." ~Vernon Sanders Law
|

18th October 2005, 04:04 PM
|
 |
Quality Team
Registration Date: Jun 2002
Location: South Carolina
Age: 70
|
|
Posts: 1,575
Thanks Given to Others: 138
Thanked 252 Times in 164 Posts
Karma Power: 209
|
|
|
Your Registrar is probably Accredited by ANSI-RAB, IATF, or some other recognized authority, to be a Certification Body. They don't need registration like we do as a producer or parts or services. This was discussed here recently, you might search for the thread to see other responses.
Hope this helps
__________________
"Nothing is constant except change"
|

18th October 2005, 04:07 PM
|
 |
E-Mails Invalid or Rejected by Recipient System
Registration Date: Jan 2005
Location: Orange County, CA
|
|
Posts: 197
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 8 Posts
Karma Power: 0
|
|
First of all, you got to be kidding me, I thought I was the only person from Ft. Wayne, IN. I am actually going to be there on Friday thru the weekend. WOW
On to your question ~~ In my opinion this is a conundrum wrapped in an enigma. Yes those suppliers having a direct impact on your QMS should be ISO registered and you can assume that your registrar is ISO as they have completed the "stringent" requirements to become a registrar, however....
That being so clear as to leave no question  I must pass this off. If I recall this came up a few weeks ago in a thread and I can not find it for the life of me. I recall Wes had some comments that were excellent as did Sidney. Try searching the threads.
Wow - Ft. Wayne....
|

18th October 2005, 04:15 PM
|
 |
Super Moderator
Registration Date: Jun 2002
Location: Lawn Guyland
Age: 62
|
|
Posts: 3,547
Thanks Given to Others: 71
Thanked 717 Times in 442 Posts
Karma Power: 413
|
|
Quote:
|
In Reply to Parent Post by Adriane
should my Registrar be ISO certified?
Preparing for reassessment in a few weeks and while reviewing my Purchasing processes and my Approved Supplier List, realized that my Registrar is NOT on my ASL. Now, I know they should be and I will update to include them. My procedure states that Suppliers that have a direct affect on the QMS are to be ISO registered. In the case that they are not self assessment takes place then... you all know the drill.
I'll hand it over to the experts and thanks in advance.
Adriane
|
You've probably written youirself out of a Registrar by limiting your suppliers to those that are ISO registered. The standard says that the extent of control on your suppliers and purchased product is dependent upon the effect on subsequent product realization or the final product, not on your QMS.
__________________
Al
|

18th October 2005, 04:45 PM
|
 |
Involved - Posts
Registration Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ft. Wayne, Indiana, US
Age: 44
|
|
Posts: 29
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Karma Power: 35 Karma: 10 
|
|
|
Not only Registered
IE Geek - Whaaat? Lemme tell ya, the Fort is a happenin' lil town.  Check out www.whatzup.com for lots to do this weekend.
Al - I don't think I've limited myself too much - I also allow compliance as determined by self assessment or if that isn't acceptable, on-site assessement. IMHO, if it affects the QMS, it also affects the integrity of the parts/services that it (the QMS) produces. Besides ISO is so commonplace these days, I didn't see how it would hinder as a requirement to at least be compliant even though said company didn't have the flag fying out in front of their building.
So, the consensus seems to be that they don't need to be registered since they're held to a more stringent standard? Guess I'll need to update Purchasing procedure then..... It's always something
EDIT: I misstated in the original post - procedure states that Suppliers be ISO registered or compliant - apologies - sometimes the mind goes faster than the fingers can type. I also did search the past threads and had no luck even though I did vaguely remember a thread similar
__________________
"Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, the lesson afterwards." ~Vernon Sanders Law
Last edited by Adriane; 18th October 2005 at 04:50 PM.
|

18th October 2005, 04:55 PM
|
 |
Super Moderator
Registration Date: Jun 2002
Location: Lawn Guyland
Age: 62
|
|
Posts: 3,547
Thanks Given to Others: 71
Thanked 717 Times in 442 Posts
Karma Power: 413
|
|
Quote:
|
In Reply to Parent Post by Adriane
Al - I don't think I've limited myself too much - I also allow compliance as determined by self assessment or if that isn't acceptable, on-site assessement. IMHO, if it affects the QMS, it also affects the integrity of the parts/services that it (the QMS) produces. Besides ISO is so commonplace these days, I didn't see how it would hinder as a requirement to at least be compliant even though said company didn't have the flag fying out in front of their building.
|
I missed the part about self assesment. It will be interesting to see their completed self assessment.
__________________
Al
|

18th October 2005, 05:00 PM
|
 |
Involved - Posts
Registration Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ft. Wayne, Indiana, US
Age: 44
|
|
Posts: 29
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Karma Power: 35 Karma: 10 
|
|
|
Yes it would..
but do I have the cajones to send one to them?
__________________
"Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, the lesson afterwards." ~Vernon Sanders Law
|

18th October 2005, 06:20 PM
|
 |
Super Moderator
Registration Date: Jun 1999
Location: Greenwood (Ft Smith area), Arkansas, USA
Age: 61
|
|
Posts: 8,020
Thanks Given to Others: 47
Thanked 2,527 Times in 1,565 Posts
Karma Power: 896
|
|
|
Accredited registrars are regularly audited by 3rd parties working on behalf of the accreditation body. They are written N/C's and have to take corrective actions just like organizations with registered systems. You can in fact look upon accreditation as a form of registration.
__________________
We who have seen war, will never stop seeing it. In the silence of the night, we will always hear the screams. Joe Galloway
|
Lower Navigation Bar
|
|
|
Do you find this discussion thread helpful and informational?
|
Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors (Members) and 1 Unregistered Guest Visitors)
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
Rate Thread Content |
Linear Mode
|
|
Forum Posting Settings
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|