Is ISO 9001 registration worth the cost in a non-manufacturing organization

[hawkeye]

Hi every one!
I know I am REALLY going to get hammered on this thread by a lot of you that work in the manufacturing industry, but it's a question I've been wanting to ask for a while now. My question is this: Is ISO certification worth the hassel to a mid sized service oriented organization? Why is it so important to attach a lable to one's quality management system? I know that ISO is a universal standard and that being certified implies that a company adheres to certain quality standards, which is needed for organizations that are large, multinational, or have multiple locations. I do see the need for ISO (or similar) standards in those cases. However, my question pertains to the domestic mid sized organization that has a fairly specific customer base. Why do ISO certification? Wouldn't a quality system of a different type be just as effective if planned and implemented properly? People have told me that because an organization has to go through a certification process, they are more likely to follow it because of the cost of training employees and implimenting the system. But couldn't a company conceivably throw the standards "out the window" once they have aceived certification and still put the ISO lable on their letterhed?
I work in the commercial printing industry where quality is a huge issue. I have looked at ISO and so has the top management at my company and they have decided not to go down that road due to the cost and the perceived limited benifits of implimenting such a system. Once again, I DO see the need for ISO certification in certain manufacturing areas, but, is it really worth it or very useful in other areas of business? I think it has been hyped up as the be-all-end -all to solving quality problems in every area of business, and all I am saying is that maybe it isn't. I would appreciate your comments. I'm here to learn and get other people's thoughts on certain opinions that I have. If my opinion is totally off- base, please let me know, that's how we all learn, new things.

Once again, be gentle!

[Sirlard]

I cannot say if it is worth the cost. But I received, just this week, a letter from a medical clinic claiming to be the largest in the US with an ISO certification. They just received certification. The group is 47 physicians employing 250 staff. According to the letter they expect to ".... improve service delivery and control of documents; and provide constant monitoring of all procedures to ensure that customer needs are being met." In the letter they say they have already experienced improvement in their billing and collection processes. Hey, I am just reporting what they say. I have heard of small single medical and dental practices being ISO certified but this is the largest medical group.

[Wes Bucey]

Originally Posted by hawkeye

Hi every one!
I know I am REALLY going to get hammered on this thread by a lot of you that work in the manufacturing industry, but it's a question I've been wanting to ask for a while now. My question is this: Is ISO certification worth the hassel to a mid sized service oriented organization? Why is it so important to attach a lable to one's quality management system? I know that ISO is a universal standard and that being certified implies that a company adheres to certain quality standards, which is needed for organizations that are large, multinational, or have multiple locations. I do see the need for ISO (or similar) standards in those cases. However, my question pertains to the domestic mid sized organization that has a fairly specific customer base. Why do ISO certification? Wouldn't a quality system of a different type be just as effective if planned and implemented properly? People have told me that because an organization has to go through a certification process, they are more likely to follow it because of the cost of training employees and implimenting the system. But couldn't a company conceivably throw the standards "out the window" once they have aceived certification and still put the ISO lable on their letterhed?
I work in the commercial printing industry where quality is a huge issue. I have looked at ISO and so has the top management at my company and they have decided not to go down that road due to the cost and the perceived limited benifits of implimenting such a system. Once again, I DO see the need for ISO certification in certain manufacturing areas, but, is it really worth it or very useful in other areas of business? I think it has been hyped up as the be-all-end -all to solving quality problems in every area of business, and all I am saying is that maybe it isn't. I would appreciate your comments. I'm here to learn and get other people's thoughts on certain opinions that I have. If my opinion is totally off- base, please let me know, that's how we all learn, new things.

Once again, be gentle!

How gentle is this?
NO organization NEEDS to pay a Registrar for registration to any Standard, UNLESS a customer requires registration as a condition of doing business AND the organization to be registered wants to keep that customer.

That said, there is a strong economic case to be made for ANY organization to make itself COMPLIANT with a Standard applicable to its industry as a way of keeping itself in tune with the best practices of its industry.

If you do not understand the difference between REGISTRATION and COMPLIANCE, please start a new thread.

Note:
In common usage in the United States, we normally speak of "Registration" to a Standard. Registration is accompanied by a "Certificate of Registration" from a Registrar. Simply stated, "Certification" and "Registration" are used interchangeably, but "Certification" implies a stamp of approval much stronger than mere testimony to the fact an organization meets the minimum requirements of Registration; it implies the goods and services of the organization meet minimum criteria.

For example, when the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) certify an organization, they are, in fact, lending their approval to the organization; that the goods and services are safe for consumers.

[hawkeye]

Originally Posted by Wes Bucey

That said, there is a strong economic case to be made for ANY organization to make itself COMPLIANT with a Standard applicable to its industry as a way of keeping itself in tune with the best practices of its industry.

If you do not understand the difference between REGISTRATION and COMPLIANCE, please start a new thread.

And there is my question Wes! Is ISO THE the best quality management system for every industry? As I stated in my original post, it seems to me that ISO has been touted as the be all end all to everyone's quality issues. All I am saying is that maybe it's not.

[Al Rosen]

I don't believe you need to register, but using a standard allows you to organize your system accordingly. Also, you should be able to measure your improvement after implementation. So you need to decide what you want to improve. The improvements should be measured in $$.

[The Taz!]

I'm with Wes. . .

Developing a QMS that works for you, DOES provide for satisfying customer requirements, allows you at grow and improve, and allows you to make a profit doesn't need a certification to say you do it.

IF however, you are looking to move into a new sector that does look at the certification as a requiremnent, then it is academic.

Perhaps your senior management have decided to stay in the niche you have carved out for yourselves. There is nothing wrong with that.

[Wes Bucey]

Originally Posted by hawkeye

And there is my question Wes! Is ISO THE the best quality management system for every industry? As I stated in my original post, it seems to me that ISO has been touted as the be all end all to everyone's quality issues. All I am saying is that maybe it's not.

That's a completely different question than

Originally Posted by hawkeye

Is ISO certification worth the hassel to a mid sized service oriented organization? Why is it so important to attach a lable to one's quality management system?

My point is/was if there is no coercion to be REGISTERED, there is no compelling reason to have anything to do with ISO. An organization is always free to follow its own desire, absent outside influence.

The economic value of being compliant to ISO or any other Standard is that you take away the cost and aggravation of re-inventing the wheel and are able to take advantage of the best efforts of a coalition of experts from across the world in setting up a comprehensive, consistent system of managing the quality practices within a variety of organizations, big and small, in a multitude of business and nonprofit fields.

Using a Standard as a benchmark makes it easy for an organization to use gap analysis to determine what it needs to bring its system up to the best practices used by world class organizations around the world.

Using a simple analogy: When doing business in the United States, you could use Latin as the official language in which you keep all your records, but then you would have to keep and maintain a special dictionary (can you say "cost?") for the definitions of words special to your industry. If you were in medicine, for example, how would you translate Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)? How would you train personnel to use your system? What costs saved in not following a Standard (American English) would be swallowed up in training new hires to work in Latin?

Similarly, you could keep the books of your business on the backs of old envelopes, but it might present some extra costs in dealing with the IRS at tax time.

Bottom line:
I guess you have to persuade me that an idiosyncratic system dreamed up by an organization is more cost-effective and useful than a Standard, rather than me persuading you that the opposite is true.

[Puzzle]

Any good (ocmpetent, reasonable etc) company will have ways (systems, procedures) of doing things. Accounts, shipping, contract review etc.

The may call them differently to what a STANDARD does. Hence the word 'standard'.

Th epoor performing company does not have any systems and are therefore a complete shambles to deal with.

If we were not required to have ISO certification then we would save the money.

I have worked for a number of very good performing companies that have not been certified. But they were forced buy customer pressure to have the certificates. Hence my involvement.

You pays your money......................