Service Supplier Evaluations - Criteria for evaluation and control of registrars

[Jim Biz]

I have a newsletter - proclaiming that the new standard will increase the focus on evaluatiing and maintaining control over "Service Suppliers" and goes beyound part/product related activities.

If that is true - how interesting it will be to see the criteria for evaluation/control over their chosen registrars services?

Any thoughts?

[Marc]

I am a consultant. I provide services. Back 4 years or more ago ISO auditors didn't freak out over evaluation of service suppliers. The original intent of the evaluation of sub-contractors was to ensure stuff you built your product with was from 'approved' (evaluated) suppliers. As ISO has evolved (with consideration to QS) evaluation of suppliers of services is (and has been for a number of years now, actually) a serious issue, if you will.

On my invoices I print a note saying they should ensure Cayman Systems is an approved, evaluated supplier as this is an ISO/QS requirement. The evaluation is to their stated requirements. Your company has to decide what your requirements are. I have seen several clients requirements for an ISO or QS consultant. Each was a bit different. One wanted lead auditor training and several other things. Another stated they just checked references because they had no idea what to ask for in an ISO consultant.

Actually, you should already have defined requirements for a registrar and evaluated the one you have. That registrar should be on your approved supplier list.

There is really no significant change - it's more of a 'clarification' or tightening of the requirement.

[eskay]

Marc,

Just a small querry. Is this a requirement? Should I evaluate my Registrar before I sign a contract with them for certification?

If yes, on what basis? What are the various things to be looked into for evaluating such registrar?

In this part of the world many companies go-in for ISO certification just for marketing purposes. I'm trying to create an awareness into this by looking into options of opening a sort of "user forum" for UAE as I'm getting too many enquiries to be a consultant for some big names here!!!

Any thoughts from you would be highly appreciated.

Thanx.
Kannan


[This message has been edited by eskay (edited 16 April 2000).]

[Marc]

Originally posted by eskay:

Should I evaluate my Registrar before I sign a contract with them for certification?

Yes!

If yes, on what basis? What are the various things to be looked into for evaluating such registrar?

You set criteria and evaluate them to it. What is their quality system based upon? You may require ISO9001 registration. You might want to call references. You might want them to be accredited by several authorities (RvA, RAB, etc.) Have they audited many companies in your SIC? Will your auditor have worked in your SIC (not just audited, but actually worked in)?

Maybe the others can help out here.

In this part of the world many companies go-in for ISO certification just for marketing purposes.

As is the case with 99% of registrations.

I'm trying to create an awareness into this by looking into options of opening a sort of "user forum" for UAE as I'm getting too many enquiries...

So send them to me!!!

... to be a consultant for some big names here!!!

So - let's make a deal... I'd be happy to come over for a while and help in implementations. Are you a consultant?

[eskay]

Marc,
Thanx for your quick reply. It was helpful.

Regarding "UAE Forum". I'm already in touch with a local company who are planning to launch a website with ISO certified companies details and a Forum for discussion on Quality issues. This is going to address more specific querries from Middle East region (atleast thats what I've been told!).

No, I'm not a consultant at the moment. I work for a marine group of companies (biggest in Middle East) as QA Chairperson. But now and then I do give suggestions/consultation to people who come to me for any help eventhough I don't charge them for such consultations. If something is going to be more beneficial (commercial), I may look into that option as well.

I'll surely get back to you with more details about the website once it is launched. Maybe you can contribute a lot to it!!!

Regards.
Kannan

this is a lot of fun talking about evaluating your registrars. But it has two problems. It doesn't matter one iota to the registrar and it's not value added.
Whats the point?

[barb butrym]

Would it be value added if you dedide that they are not providing you with fair comprehensive audits, on time or for a competitive price? Sure would drive me to switch......Would it add value to find out they are loosing credibility in the industry? Would it add value to know they never return your calls?

Once you know you are satisfied, you kick back and watch for changes.....but you still watch. The level of evaluation/control is different from raw material suppliers, but indeed is a value added exercise. each commodity you purchase has different controls, you should define them acordingly.

[Jim Biz]

IMHO, it may not be so much fun discussing this, – depending upon the interpretation and application of the wording. If they don’t care they should because it could turn out to be more than a sticky / serious issue.

Given that - if what we are expected to accomplish in evaluation and control over their services is viewed as “not adequate”. --- The follow-up thought process COULD be “– how are they “adequately controlling” any other service supplier. Resulting in numerous, repeated “favorite issue” nonconformance reports.

Quite possible that my short term, 5 year exposure to all of this has yet to unveil all the except for -factors surrounding the issue. It may be one of those – we will accept control of the standards documentation as we see fit – publish number and communicate what is current-that’s all we need to do. Except Mr./Ms Customer is in “non-adequate control nonconformance” unless/until other, measures of control and physical removal are used.