Am I the only one who thinks ISO9001 isn't good?

[AndyN]

McDonalds does make superior product in their market. The product is the taste, speed and accuracy of the order among other things.

I'm guessing you've never had Culvers...http://www.culvers.com/

 

[kgott]

There are several reasons for me to think like I mentioned in the title.

The Standard encourages actions that ignore the theory of variation which is important in quality thinking.. For example, the advice on error-cause-removal ignores the distinction between common causes and special causes – it encourages managers to respond when something goes wrong. .

This is a sad day indeed if this occurs. I suspect this is a carry over from safety which ignorance of the theory of variation is not far off universal where every incident must be investigated and action must be taken - even on normal variation events.

 

[Steve Prevette]

Wheeee Nothing like ISO or Six Sigma to get folks going . . .

 

[Wilderness Woody]

Quality isn't about superior products, it's about meeting customer requirements. Think McDonalds, not superior products, but millions get exactly what they want and are satisfied with the food, at the price etc..

ISO 9001 is a model for achieving customer requirements. I think you may be confused over the intent of implementing ISO 9001.

The basic structure that ISO 9001 brings to the table can certainly help organizations pull up and out of the primordial ooze of poor organizational management and set a standard for control to repeat conformance. The interdependence of suppliers whether local, regional or global really needs a stable, consistent stream of conforming product to keep the system flowing and costs controlled.

Excellence is a whole different topic, but the chances of getting to a point of being deemed consistently excellent without a strong underpinning of principles (like ISO 9000 series) is rather small. Truly excellent organizations can transcend the seemingly stifling or burdensome standard by really understanding their role in meeting and exceeding customers needs and expectations.

Yes, there may be certain elements/clauses that can be "overbearing" on particular business entities and their specific products or services, but there is enough flexibility in the implementation of the standard so as not to be totally unreasonable for any particular user. Just need to be able to work through the process... know your customer, know yourself, deliver the results, document and repeat!

 

[AndyN]

Thank you Woody! Eloquently stated - you are most welcome here at the Cove!

 

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Welcome to the Cove, Woody and... what Andy said. Good first post

/Claes

 

[Juuso]

Thank you for this rich and delightful discussion. I intentionally cited Seddon's thoughts because I wanted to evoke conversation. People working around ISO are often a bit blind sighted to things around them and it is good to stop and think about what we are doing. Again, thank you and by all means I didn't intend to use the thoughts as my own. Of course I knew that most of you know his work.

 

[TPMB4]

Just read page 21 of the link to Seddon's piece. Talk about total buy-in to Seddon's arguments. I was a little surprised by how the poster used the same words almost verbatim. People usually have their own posting style on here and put ideas into their own words so to see identical wording, well it's unusual I think. Not saying it is plagiarism just unusual.

Anyway, some very good debate on here overnight. Excellent posts and people putting their view across quite eloquently in some cases. I guess some thread topics bring the best out of people. For my 2 cents worth I can partly see what the ISO 9001 nay sayers are on about but side with those who see it as a kind of framework towards a management system that is of a high quality and serves your company well. It is what you make of it and you don't have to just stop with the bare minimum to become certified.

Some interesting comments about world class automotive companies and their differences. That is something I would like to learn more about some day. Currently working my way through one of the many Toyota system books out there, but would like to know if there are any for the big three? I digress.

The one thing I think I read or interpreted in a post is that ISO9001 is a framework for quality not excellence. I like that because nothing really stops in quality field, always moving things on. That phrase sums up my view that ISO9001 compliance / certification is only the beginning of a journey. Whether you call it excellence or pin a figure on it like zero defects it's about where to go after the certificate on the wall.

 

[Frankie11]

Of course I knew that most of you know his work.

It seems to me that a lot of people come here are fairly new to the quality world and wouldn't have a clue who Sedden is (I don't). I've been working with ISO 9001 for six years now and I've only just learned the name Deming (thanks to this website) so I don't think anyone should just assume that everyone will know that they're quoting someone.

By stating who's ideas you're citing, you're giving all the newbies here an opportunity to expand their knowledge and understanding. For example, I've read a number of posts here that offer advice while referring back to Deming's principles. These posts always resonated with me and I ended up buying a great book about him which I have found incredibly helpful.

 

[AndyN]

Thank you for this rich and delightful discussion. I intentionally cited Seddon's thoughts because I wanted to evoke conversation. People working around ISO are often a bit blind sighted to things around them and it is good to stop and think about what we are doing. Again, thank you and by all means I didn't intend to use the thoughts as my own. Of course I knew that most of you know his work.

And, his comments were based on the ISO versions BEFORE 2000, so, in effect they are null and void for many reasons!

Since much of Seddon's comments are fundamentally incorrect "Say what you do, do what you say" (he himself can't distinguish implementation from the act of 3rd party certification which wasn't the intent of BS 5750 at all) all he does is basically clamour that the Toyota Production System is THE model for quality. If his basic understanding is confused, what's the chances that the rest of his diatribe is lacking in accuracy?

I have personal experience where, in implementing a QMS based on ISO 9001, (NOT just certification) - at an organization saw a 42% improvement in First Time Capability! And they used the TPS basics to meet various requirements. Up to the point they rolled out their QMS, their efforts at TPS had been slow and limited - taking a long time to implement because there were probably a lot of TPS consultants (like Seddon is) who want to get paid for a long time!