Can this be a case for Design and Development Exclusion

[Big Jim]

OK. I said I wouldn't get dragged into the 'It is design ... No it isn't' infantile debate ... and I'm not.

But just in support of Richard there are some intelligent people out there who are trying to understand quality in an organizational environment and are quite prepared to explain their thinking to an externel auditor.

... and hey if their certification body says different, guess what? ... they get a more reasonable CB!

Don't forget that the CBs are monitored by the accreditation bodies. The accreditation bodies require that the CBs check the accuracy of scope statements. If the accreditation bodies find that they did not, they write nonconformances against the CBs.

Finding a CB that will violate the rules shows a lack of integrity on the part of both the organization and the CB. This gives the entire ISO 9000 quality management scheme a black eye.

 

[Paul Simpson]

Don't forget that the CBs are monitored by the accreditation bodies. The accreditation bodies require that the CBs check the accuracy of scope statements. If the accreditation bodies find that they did not, they write nonconformances against the CBs.

Finding a CB that will violate the rules shows a lack of integrity on the part of both the organization and the CB. This gives the entire ISO 9000 quality management scheme a black eye.

In all this you have assumed that all CBs will take the view that you do. I know they don't (having worked for a few in full and part time roles over the years) so the ones that listen and take the time to understand what it is I do get my vote and my business.

With the same experience of reviewing scope statements and dealing with accreditation bodies I also know how they work and am confident that there are no issues here. So far from 'violating the rules' and 'lack of integrity' that you assert I am merely indicating to Covers that they don't have to accept what an auditor tells them - they can complain to the CB initially and / or transfer their business to a more reasonable business partner.

What CB was it you work for again?

 

[Big Jim]

In all this you have assumed that all CBs will take the view that you do. I know they don't (having worked for a few in full and part time roles over the years) so the ones that listen and take the time to understand what it is I do get my vote and my business.

With the same experience of reviewing scope statements and dealing with accreditation bodies I also know how they work and am confident that there are no issues here. So far from 'violating the rules' and 'lack of integrity' that you assert I am merely indicating to Covers that they don't have to accept what an auditor tells them - they can complain to the CB initially and / or transfer their business to a more reasonable business partner.

What CB was it you work for again?

I'm glad you are confident. You may get away with it. You may not. Don't be surprised when you have that illusion imploded.

 

[Richard Pike]

But your certification body can and will.

Sorry -- you are incorrect. They cannot and will not!! (at least not reputable ones)

Not if motivated correctly, and explained correctly. You are telling people that the Cert body knows more about an organizations business then they do! Absolute rubbish, unless you have incompetent management, and dont even go there..

This is just scare mongering by consultants trying to justify their existence...... mountains out of molehills .. and it is what gives the quality profession such a bad name.

Im not saying if a company is design responsible -- it should be ignored -- what I am saying is that if "professional people" (not scare mongers) cannot agree if it is- or if it is not -- then on those borderline cases - the Cert Body MUST go with the clients justification, and invariably do just that!

 

[Stijloor]

Richard,

For clarity purposes, what is the post # you are responding to?

For a response to a particular post, you can hit the "quote" button and add your comments.

Thanks.

Stijloor.

 

[Richard Pike]

Richard,

For clarity purposes, what is the post # you are responding to?

For a response to a particular post, you can hit the "quote" button and add your comments.

Thanks.

Stijloor.

Sorry about that: - thanks; will note note in future . It was No. 49 .. where Big Jim answered my comment "they can and they will"

 

[Paul Simpson]

Much as I hate to double team on anyone - but hey he says he's 'Big' Jim so I guess he can take it - IMHO Richard is correct (I would say that as we seem to agree! ).

To believe a CB auditor is an arbiter of quality is just ridiculous. Even Quality professionals employed by the organization should be deferring to the internal 'experts' and ensuring both that key controls are implemented and unnecessary bureaucracy is avoided as the system is developed.

That's why I asked what CB Jim works for. If I can avoid the argument by going to a CB that is understaning of another's point of view then I will.

 

[Stijloor]

Sorry about that: - thanks; will note note in future . It was No. 49 .. where Big Jim answered my comment "they can and they will"

Richard,

Quote now included.

Stijloor.

 

[Richard Pike]

Don't forget that the CBs are monitored by the accreditation bodies. The accreditation bodies require that the CBs check the accuracy of scope statements. If the accreditation bodies find that they did not, they write nonconformances against the CBs.

Finding a CB that will violate the rules shows a lack of integrity on the part of both the organization and the CB. This gives the entire ISO 9000 quality management scheme a black eye.

Surely its not just a question of "covering ones backside" Its about making the right decision which is not necessarily the safe decision..

You are scare mongering by using words such as "violate the rules" . There are different interpretations of the rules, that's what this entire discusion is about. I respect your opinion and simply ask the same in return.

As for NC,s against CB,s; they would do better looking elsewhere to prevent "black eyes" being given to the ISO Cert Scheme; there is sooo much scope!.

A colleague of mine once refereed to them all as "fleas on the back of fleas" which at times can be a pretty good analogy. but that's another subject!

 

[howste]

Products are designed,drawings done by my bosses, owners of business,design and drawings are send to ATL (test lab)and after approval we start production.

Andre, what do the drawings contain? Are they part drawings, schematics, or something else?