Integrity lost? Conflict of Interest? ISO 9000 'Keepers' Profit from their books

[CarolX]

OK…here I go again on my soapbox.

A few weeks ago I attended a 9K2K transitioning seminar sponsored by ASQ. The course included instruction materials including a copy of the book "ISO 9001:2000 Explained". As we worked our way through the material and referenced the book, I found it to be very helpful.

About halfway through the day, I happened to flip the book over to read a little about the authors. Here is what is says (no editing on my part, but not the full text)

"Charles A. Cianfrani is the U.S. Expert representative to ISO/TC/176/SC2/WG18, the Working Group that wrote ISO 9001/4:2000."

"Joseph J. Tsiakals is the medical device technical expert on the ISO/TC 176 writing team for ISO 9001:2000 and previously was the lead U.S. Expert representative for the development of ISO 9001:1994. Mr. Tsiakals is a member of the board of directors of the Registrar Accreditation Board."

"John E. (Jack) West is chairman of the U.S. Technical Advisory Group for ISO/TC 176 and Lead Delegate for the United States to the International Organization for Standardization committee responsible for the ISO 9000 family of quality management standards."

Well, yes….these guys are the experts, that is why the book is so helpful…..but I don't like it. Not one bit. Not only do they get to write the standard, they publish the book (ASQ Member Price: $36.00, List Price: $45.00) on how to understand it, and one of them is on the board of the RAB.

I am not so naïve not to understand this is how the real world operates. But how can integrity be bought?

OK….steam blown for the day. Thanks for listening!




CarolX

[Atul Khandekar]

I would think those who wrote it are the best people to explain it. You agree that the book is helpful.

Should they charge money for it? Well, why not?

[M Greenaway]

But do they have a vested interest in making the standard vague and incomprehensible in order to be able to publish a book on the subject, or are they just milking the whole third party certification facade for what its worth ?

Is it wrong ?

IMHO - yes.

[gpainter]

The ASQ ISO 9001:2000 Handbook was written by the three mentioned for $96.00. Seems like a conflict of interest. Both books are good reference books but do not tell all. I think most who bought the books figured that they would be a tell all. But, I guess the TC has to come to some type of agreement! Do not forget all the speeches, public and private instruction. Hey, someone has to make some $$$$ on ISO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[David Hartman]

Let's not forget that this version of the standard, once authored, went through several years of review and modification by a very LARGE committee (several countries of committees in-fact). So to blame the vagueness of the documents on the 3 men named here seems more than a little unfair. After all, do any of you know what their "original" draft looked like?

Perhaps the only way that these men feel that they can maintain their integrity is to provide books that include the details that they were forced to leave out (just a hypothesis, but just as valid as putting all of the blame for its' vagueness on them). And if they can make some money out of keeping their integrity, great for them - after all any of us could author similar books (many of you have written reams of text on the subject right here in the Cove).

[Sam]

I agree with M. Soemthing is wrong if a book has to be written to expalin a standard or specification. If those were the same people that authored the standard then why not incorporate those thiughts into the original.
IMO forget the self-help-books. The standard is rather easy to read and comprehend, at least easier than most. Implement it as you understand it and present it to your CB. If they do not agree, then each of you should present evidence of your interpretations and come to an agreement.

[Mike S.]

I would see a conflict of interest, and integrity problems, only if these guys purposefully made the standard more difficult to understand with the intention of making money off a "how-to" book. If someone can show me evidence this happened, then I have a problem with it. Otherwise, I don't. The standard could not have been made 100, 200, 300 pages long to include detailed explanations, examples, etc.

I asked myself, if I were the co-author of a standard on how to do the measurements that I do in my work, AND I wrote the standard as well as I possibly could, would I feel guilty if I later wrote a more in-depth book on the measurements for profit. I don't think so. I think this is fairly standard practice and do not see a problem with it. Why shouldn't I profit from my hard work and knowledge, just like we all do in our daily work? JMO.

Mike S. said:

I would see a conflict of interest, and integrity problems, only if these guys purposefully made the standard more difficult to understand with the intention of making money off a "how-to" book.

Who knows what evil lurks in the minds of ..........?

Mike S. said:

Why shouldn't I profit from my hard work and knowledge, just like we all do in our daily work? JMO.

You little prostitute, you!