Customer satisfaction monitoring - ISO 9001 and 14001

[Big Jim]

About changing the culture about ISO:

• That is top management's job. The entire Section 5 is about how well they support the QMS.
• People usually hold ISO at arm's length because they don't understand its language. And they have a point: what does context even mean?
• I suggest you get a copy of the book ISO 9001:2015 in Plain English. It is very good at, well, explaining in plain English. Plug along, be honest, be fair and open with the people, speak plainly and help make a positive difference with a common sense QMS that includes people, not just gives assignments. If they can be saved, the ones that count will eventually come around and may be helpful to influence others. Be patient: this can take a long time.

I hope this helps.

I often wonder why the writers don't understand that a more clearly written standard would be so very much more effective.

 

[Mike S.]

About customer satisfaction:

• People usually hold ISO at arm's length because they don't understand its language. And they have a point: what does context even mean?
• I suggest you get a copy of the book ISO 9001:2015 in Plain English. It is very good at, well, explaining in plain English. Plug along, be honest, be fair and open with the people, speak plainly and help make a positive difference with a common sense QMS that includes people, not just gives assignments. If they can be saved, the ones that count will eventually come around and may be helpful to influence others. Be patient: this can take a long time.

One thing recall hearing about some government standards or procedures is that they had to be written in plain language that someone with a 10th grade education could read and understand. But the elites at ISO will probably not ever do that because it doesn't give them the opportunity to look smarter than the rest of us.

 

[Jen Kirley]

One thing recall hearing about some government standards or procedures is that they had to be written in plain language that someone with a 10th grade education could read and understand. But the elites at ISO will probably not ever do that because it doesn't give them the opportunity to look smarter than the rest of us.

I would agree, but when looking at it carefully I am reminded that the standard (as with them all) is intended to also be used by people having English as a second language.

Choice of words matters. For example: we would probably say "I will run the machine" but there are dozens of ways to use the word run, but fewer optional meanings for the word operate. So the Technical Committee would choose the word operate.

That's a simplistic example but it's what I have, not actually being a Committee member.

I was in a meeting with Chinese suppliers when the engineer in my project stated such-and-such group would turn over their documents. That stopped our suppliers instantly. They launched into lengthy discussion among themselves, trying to translate turn over. It took me almost 10 minutes to try one description after another until I could explain the term satisfactorily so we could move on...er, resume the discussion.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

I would agree, but when looking at it carefully I am reminded that the standard (as with them all) is intended to also be used by people having English as a second language.

Actually the terminology is impacted by the fact that the standards have to be translated and translatable in to many different languages. This simple fact affects the choice of words used, as Jennifer’s case exemplifies.

 

[Randy]

Even English doesn't translate directly into English and therefore causes confusion within itself.

True story (slightly modified for space)........... During the 1992 Los Angeles Riots (AKA Rodney King Riots) a group of US Marines was assigned to accompany members of the Compton Police Department on a domestic disturbance. Upon arrival the police officers told the Marines to "cover them" as the officers got to the front door of the residence and knocked. When the officers knocked on the door the Marines opened fire with their weapons. In the end, nobody was injured, the police officers resolved the situation and procedures between the US Marines, City of Compton and the police were severely changed.

The main problem was use of exact language that had 2 totally different meaning in 2 completely different cultures. I was present and served during the Los Angeles Riots as a member of the California National Guard (Army), I had previously served as a US Marine, and I was a retired police officer, so therefore I had hands on personal experience in all the cultures and language uses and the situation involved............ Shortly after the incident occurred those of us serving in the "Riot Area" were briefed about the incident and what to do or not do when helping out civilian law enforcement. When the briefing officer mentioned the phrase "cover us" I loudly spoke out "Oh &hit!!!" as did others in our group who had served in the Marine Corps as well........ As a police officer the term "cover me" is universally understood here in the US as "be watchful, look out for our safety and so on" and requires no direct action.........In the US Marine Corps "cover me" is universally understood and has been used for the last 100+ years to mean "open fire".

Across 170+ countries, cultures, languages or whatever there is not now or in the foreseeable future any way to directly translate our words.... In fact there will be some here who will misunderstand my story above and probably report it for who knows what.