Can we use ISO 9004 to certify?

S

s_warin

The other forum in this cove says that ISO 9001 is the base, then ISO 9004 and MBNQA is on the top. As we can use ISO 9001 to certify, can we use ISO 9004?

If MBNQA can be the Business Excellence Model, can we use ISO 9004 as the BEM?

(Thanks Jim Wade for your initiative):biglaugh:
 
D

db

Registering to 9004

It depends on what you mean "use". If you mean that if you follow 9004, then would the system be compliant to 9001, my guess would be that it should. You would need to perform an audit to make sure.

An organization cannot be registered to 9004, only 9001. Of course, I suppose you could self declare you're compliant to 9004, but I'm not certain that would do you much good.
 
D

db

I said:

I'm not certain that would do you much good
What I meant by this is that I don't think most organizations would understand self-declaration to 9004. They might think that the organization was totally clueless. However, if it were to gain momentum, then it could be a real asset. What if an organization advertised ISO 9001 registered and ISO 9004 compliant? Now, we may have something!

Jim said:
9004 certification (if and when it exists)
I think that would be a very interesting scenario. Imagine it. Companies that just want the flag can register to 9001. Those that want a system that really works register to 9004. I could definately separate the wheat from the chaff.
 
M

M Greenaway

But Jim

Do you think that the certification process itself has devalued ISO9001, hence will have the same effect on ISO9004 ?
 
D

db

Devaluation

Martin, I think what devalued 9001 was when customers started making it mandatory. If organizations would become registered to 9001, strictly for the process control and improvement, then its value would increase. Should 9004 become mandatory, then it too will suffer the same fate as 9001, and we would be looking for its replacement.
 
A

Aaron Lupo

Jim Wade said:

Re ISO 9004 certification

I wish I could locate the reference on the BSIAmericas site that seemd to imply that BSI were planning something along those lines.

Did anybody else spot the reference or can anyone locate it?

rgds Jim

That would not really be possible as 9004:2000 is un-auditable.
 
E

energy

Whack-a-Mole?

Jim Wade said:

Certification to a narrow chunk of ISO 9000 has certainly devalued it, IMO, Martin.

Maybe someone will come up with a more meaningful scheme to include the whole ISO 9000 concept.

In any case, what happens next with ISO 9000 will be interesting. It might not further the cause of 'quality' much, but it will be fun.

And it can't be any more embarrassing and shameful than the status quo. Or can it?

rgds Jim

There is a popular amusement park game called Whacka-Mole. There are several little mole-like characters that pop up one at a time and go back into the hole at random in no particular sequence. The object is to take this fairly big cushioned mallet and bop that little sucker and smash it back into the hole. The game is set up in a circle so that many people start smashing their own little group of moles at the sound of the bell. When the bell sounds again, the winner is the person with the most number of recorded hits. You win a 25 cent stuffed toy, but the joy of winning is obvious.
What does that game have to do with this thread? Well, that's how I feel every time this topic comes up regarding the certificate vs its value. The MO's. the MHO's, JMHO's do not lessen the impact that mole has on me. It doesn't really matter what the thread is, up pops the "certificate" mole, again. It pops up where you never expect to see it. But, you know it's coming. Any second now. Thus the popularity of the actual Amusement park game.

Those striving for the certificate and those who already have the certificate, consultants who have implemented ISO 9001, Registrars who issued the certificate and all Auditors (internal/external) who issued favorable reports that resulted in a company obtaining the certificate should feel cheapened by this constant reminder that what we do, or what we are trying to do is, well, it just doesn't measure up to the grand scheme of things. Like, we should all be looking at a particular vision to really be accomplishing something. If not, you may be a "Chalatan". Oh yes, I remember that little mole well.

Just when I'm feeling comfortable and enjoying the game, this mole appears and impulsively I have to whack at it. I've whacked at in the past and will continue to whack it every time that little sucker shows its head. It an unarguable position and like ISO Guy has posted (even though it's considered the party line :bonk: ), unauditable. I consider it mere chatter with a condescending tone. Just another indefensible position that I'm taking issue with. Just another mole! Hey, it's JMHO! :agree:
:ko: :smokin:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
E

energy

Already known

Jim,

Knowing the hard work it is for a company and considerable expense affecting resources, getting the certificate means that you meet the minimum requirements. Yes, minimum. That doesn't mean I advocate doing the least possible to achieve certification. You do your best to comply. Someone may look at us and say, you really haven't set your sights on a loftier goal. That's Okay. We will be certified. As has been said many times before, Marketing wants it...More and more Customers require it....The Company CEO wants it. When I see where we were and what it we're shaping up to be, it is positive.

This view you have is admirable, really. In a lot of cases, it's just not doable. But, that's what Continuous Improvement is supposed to be all about. So, to imply that the Certificate is somehow meaingless sticks in my craw. Whack, Whack. :vfunny: That's my stand and I'm stickin wit it.:agree:

:ko: :smokin:
 
E

energy

I thought of you!

Jim Wade said:

Certification to a narrow chunk of ISO 9000 has certainly devalued it, IMO, Martin.

In any case, what happens next with ISO 9000 will be interesting. It might not further the cause of 'quality' much, but it will be fun.

And it can't be any more embarrassing and shameful than the status quo. Or can it?

rgds Jim

We recently received a mailer from a Supplier containing a copy of Certificate of Registration to ISO9001:2000. The fancy "seals" are" UKAS Quality Management"; Accredited by the RvA, Dutch Council for Accreditation; ANSI-RAB QMS and Perry Johnson Registrars, Inc. Wowee. This, just as I'm rejecting material back to this Supplier.
Hey, not supposed to happen, Bucko! Right? Oh, I'm so disappointed. Whoodahthought? :biglaugh: :ko::smokin:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top Bottom