The ISO 9000 ecosystem - a clear(?) vision for the future of the ISO 9000 family

[Sidney Vianna]

I won't offer any comments at this time. Just the facts.

 

[Pancho]

By their very nature ecosystems are exceedingly complex. They are difficult to establish and even more challenging to maintain in balance, bu t without a healthy ecosystem the organisms that depend on them die. In like manner, the ISO 9000 family of standards relies on sustenance from its ecosystem to adapt and continue to succeed. What are the elements of such an ecosystem? Certainly standards and guidelines such as ISO 9004 and the 10000 series are critical elements. But much, much more is necessary to make the ecosystem viable – things like tools, case studies, white papers, standard implementation collateral, communication vehicles and feedback mechanisms -- all elements that sustain and invigorate the primary standards, make them more robust and easy to use, and propel them into new application domains, adapting as they go.

Perhaps a lil baby step might involve a blog to post these types of documents (Chair's Technical Messages, etc.), opening them to comments from the community of users?

 

[Jim Wynne]

I won't offer any comments at this time. Just the facts. opefully, it is being used for medicinal purposes.

It all looks like ISOspeak gobbledygook to me. I especially enjoyed this bit:

The world desperately seeks answers to the monumental challenges that define our times. Most of us in ISO/TC 176 believe that the ISO 9000 family of standards can make a significant contribution to formulating these solutions. The ISO 9000 ecosystem can be the agent for bringing the latent power of the ISO 9000 family to bear and for making ISO/TC 176 a dynamic part of the solution to some of the world’s most pressing problems.

I think the 2008 revision of ISO 9001 is evidence of this "latent power," which is the power to make insignificant changes in the face of "monumental challenges."

 

[machrk]

I had heard that there was a new chairman of TC 176 and he wanted to review the future directions of ISO 9001 & its family of related standards - call it an ecosystem if you will.

At our last Australian Standards Committee meeting - our 2 reps on TC 176 SC 2 had said that coming out of Bogota there could emerge different perspectives.

It is possible that there may be a meeting in Sydney Australia in December of TC 176 or or their committees - was originally scheduled for a nearby country who have been unable to host the meeting.

If there are any interesting developments I will seek to share these

cheers
@KerrieAnne aka machrk

 

[Sidney Vianna]

I think the 2008 revision of ISO 9001 is evidence of this "latent power," which is the power to make insignificant changes in the face of "monumental challenges."

Maybe it is just me, but I suspect this gentleman (TC chair) might be a little too ambitious. When you realize that the TC 176 can not even keep their website up to date, to take on Mankind's most daring challenges seem a little too far reaching...

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Perhaps a lil baby step might involve a blog to post these types of documents (Chair's Technical Messages, etc.), opening them to comments from the community of users?

I think that is an excellent suggestion. The TC 176 should use current technology to broaden it's reach and speed up the standard review and revision process. It is time for some serious re-thinking on how the TC's operate and shift the "face to face" meetings and other paradigms. Promoting web-based meetings would even help the TC 176 reduce their environmental impact and carbon footprint.

I would not mind mind if they took control of the What should be changed in the ISO 9001:20145 thread.

 

[JaneB]

I would not mind mind if they took control of the What should be changed in the ISO 9001:20145 thread.

Even for you with your far-sightedness, Sidney, is this taking planning for the future to a bit of an extreme?
I assume you perhaps meant to write 2014?

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Even for you with your far-sightedness, Sidney, is this taking planning for the future to a bit of an extreme?
I assume you perhaps meant to write 2014?

It is hard to see, but I wrote 20145 with the 4 stricken through. I should have used 2014 2015, instead.

 

[Marc]

It all looks like ISOspeak gobbledygook to me. I especially enjoyed this bit:
I think the 2008 revision of ISO 9001 is evidence of this "latent power," which is the power to make insignificant changes in the face of "monumental challenges."

How do you see this now that it is 2018 and ISO 9001:2015 is the current standard which essentially added "Risk"?

 

[al40]

More confusing language for those trying to consider if they want to obtain ISO and join our "ecosystem"..
Best,
Al40