Are accredited calibration laboratories more profitable than non-accredited

[curioushuang]

Hi elsmar,

we are currently a non-accredited calibration lab and have a medium size customer base. If we were to become accredited we will charge more for our services, but if we do, we will lose many of our current customers. Is there any input as to where the money is (accredited vs. non-accredited)?

I'd like to say we did an in depth market analysis but we haven't, actually not even sure where or how to accomplish such a task. Any help would be appreciated

Andy

 

[celestica - 2005]

Any company can avial of the services of an external calibration laboratory as long as the callab is acceptable by the customer or accredited to ISO 17025 or national equivalent.

If your clients are not asking for your lab's accreditation, then it is more favorable on your part in terms of cost. Just see to it that your lab is "credible", e.g. traceability, MU, etc. However, if you want to target clients that are "big time", then it is inevitable that you have to get accreditation.

 

[corollax]

If you are a commercial lab, getting accreditation may open your lab to new customers who require an endorsed certificate. Having said that, the work involved in seeking accreditation is massive, technical, & incur high costs to get the right standards/masters/equipment, with more frequent calibrations needed thereafter. And after getting accreditation, it’ll probably take longer to complete the calibration work that requires an endorsed report. Charging more IS to recover all these losses, but if there are other similar labs in your vicinity.......... :-( Customers who use accredited labs are likely due to regulatory req'mt and they will probably use the cheapest source who can give them a cal sticker & cal cert with logo – nevermind what’s on the report or the MU or the lab’s BMC... So, your decision should ultimately be customer-driven or regulatory...

 

[Hershal]

First question: What is/are your market(s)? That will make a difference.

If you currently service accredited test labs for example, count on the requirement coming back to you.....or on having audits from one or more customers, each bringing an ISO/IEC 17025 checklist obtained from IAS or similar, and bringing one or more metrology professionals. After a couple such audits, the cost of obtaining an accreditation is more than offset.

There are five accrediting bodies that do or can operate in the U.S., that are internationally recognized, which means your customer base should easily accept them.....IAS (the former ICBO, based in Calif), A2LA, NVLAP, L-A-B, and SCC/CLAS.

In the end, your customers drive your accreditation decision, and it is a business decision.

Hope this helps.

Hershal

 

[Baldrick]

Yes - I agree with everything Hershal just said.

Deciding whether to become accredited is indeed a business decision.

However you shouldn't forget that you don't need to be certified/accredited to adopt the principles in standards such as 17025, ISO9001 etc. Doing so will usually improve, and add value to, your business - if you do it right.

If you decide not to go for accreditation, I would recommend that you at least consider developing your systems so they gradually become compliant with the requirements of 17025. This will make it quicker and easier to achieve the accreditation should you need to do so in future.

I'm reminded of a recent statement my ex-boss made to a supplier who was questioning our policy of only using ISO9001-approved suppliers. The supplier asked "Will your company accept the price increases we will have to apply due to the costs we will incur in obtaining ISO certification?"

My boss said "Yes! Provided your company also passes on all of the savings you will make as a result of improving your business".