Generating ISO 9001 interest in management.

Golfman25

Trusted Information Resource
I agree with the comments stating to start with ISO 9001 first. I also agree that if your company has been in business for awhile then there is most likely a system in place already. Now, you need to understand how the system that is currently in place compares to the requirements of ISO 9001, and as recommended by others, conducting a gap analysis is a good way of doing that. My recommendation on doing the gap analysis is do as much of it you can on your own, and then pull in Management/Process Owners as needed.

What I disagree with is the comments suggesting you should look for another job. The fact is people don't like change, especially if they don't understand the change. Many people don't understand the purpose of ISO 9001 or what is involved with the requirements. My experience is that if you learn as much as you can about ISO 9001, and then help Management/Process Owners learn about it, then they become more open to it.
Even better is you strip all the "ISO" gibberish out of your vocabulary. Go in with the business case to do X or Y or Z. They fact that you'll comply with an ISO requirement is just the gravy.
 

Golfman25

Trusted Information Resource
Who said it was all management's fault?

The point that was being made is that if they are no on board you are knackered from day one.

I agree that if you have the support of the higherups a gap analysis is probably the best place to start however I would disagree that if a company has been in business for some time 80% is already done, because from experience that is definitely not the case.
If I had a nickel for every management complaint on these boards, I'd very wealthy. How do we know they "aren't on board?" Maybe they don't agree with the approach?

So you think businesses survive these days without doing at least the basic ISO stuff? I doubt it.
 

Randy

Super Moderator
So you think businesses survive these days without doing at least the basic ISO stuff?
Correct. Almost all the basic requirements have always been done, maybe not in some type of controlled fashion but done never the less (I hesitate to use any slang for requirements in fear of causing offense to someone).
 

Paul Simpson

Trusted Information Resource
Hello all,

This is my first post here so excuse me if I am making a duplicate post, I couldn't find anything by searching.

At the end of last year, my company decided that ISO and IATF are necessary for us to acquire new customers in our exhaust business. I am a quality technician and was brought up into the project after my manager(who is no longer with the company thank goodness) decided he wasn't interested in pushing this project forward. I have no previous ISO or IATF knowledge and am learning day-by-day and reading ISO books for more info. My problem at the moment is upper management has little to no interest in getting involved in the process, and from what I've read the majority of the culture push and performance changes begin from upper management. I have been generating forms and procedures as I go, and when I try to bring production or engineering managers into the process, I get a lot of eye-rolls, crossing arms and sighs.

I feel like I'm going crazy. I have a monumental objective to complete but those with the power to help and push the project forward give little to no effort to cooperate and align our goals. What would you guys do in my situation? Bring it up to the CEO who brought up this task in the first place and then fell off the face of the earth on the project? It seems like there is a objective that the company agrees we need to complete, but getting those involved isn't a priority to any important employees of the company.

Thank you for your comments and guidance.

Cheers,
T
You have had some good advice here. I'd agree that you have to use language that your CEO will relate to. Try and translate all of clause 5 that relates to the role of top management and tell them that if this isn't in place then nothing else will follow.

I agree that you shouldn't start with producing documents. That route leads to madness! You'll get pigeon-holed as the document guy/gal and ignored.

If you can identify someone from the senior team to use as a sponsor and pilot with a good QMS then that will be a start and use the positives that come from the work to persuade others.

If none of the above is possible or it doesn't work then tidy up your resume. It's time to find an organisation where your work will be appreciated.

Good luck and let us know how you get on.
 

Jen Kirley

Quality and Auditing Expert
Leader
Admin
I recall an esteemed ex-boss using the term "It's like pushing a rope." That seems to fit here.

A change in attitude, as it has been explained in the initial post, typically requires a crisis of some kind, and/or sometimes a turnover in management. Like with Boeing, who is just the most recent example of many. Your role, if you choose to stick with it (I believe that is questionable as I wonder if they respect you enough to follow the path you set out) would include change agent. You would need to learn management's language - the language of money, probably. Learn to identify and describe value in activities and failures. We have ways to measure that but it takes some effort and this task you've been handed is truly monumental.

@Golfman25 is right in that you should start with a gap analysis, as there are many required things that I expect your organization is already doing, and avoid using the term ISO and its similar jargon because the standards actually resemble the business plan templates I have reviewed, just in technical form.

Please let us know how it's going. You are among friends here.

I am not affiliated with MSG or Kotter International.
 

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Leader
Admin
@Golfman25 is right in that you should start with a gap analysis, as there are many required things that I expect your organization is already doing,
If one is gonna do that, have a "gap analysis" done ASAP against SECTION 5 of the Standards (9001/16949). That section deals with the leadership component of the organization. If done by someone who knows what the standard is aiming at, it should be an eye-opener for the involved people, especially as in this case, by top management who seems to be aloof, derelict and uninvolved with the management of this pesky little thing called quality.

Focusing a "gap analysis" on section 5 should save a lot of time and effort for a mission impossible scenario because it would expose quickly how serious top management really is.
 

poh.s.lim

Poh S. Lim (Minuteman MMXXIII)
I agree with most of the comments given above. The current ISO standard has clearly stated that "top management" has to be the leadership of the organization and has to provide all resources, so if the leader (namely the CEO) is not on board, the initiative would be bound for failure.

Having said that, if the CEO himself is not on board, why should you be leading this initiative? Do not stress yourself over something that you have very little capability to influence.

Best of luck!
 

Scanton

Quite Involved in Discussions
So you think businesses survive these days without doing at least the basic ISO stuff? I doubt it.

I can understand that belief if you haven't seen it first hand. However I have, and if you are first to market and then continue to be the only company to not only have the goods available, but also continue to be cheaper than your competitors, the niceties of due process and after sales can go hang.

However even after having a thriving business for 25+ years it will eventually catch up with you, and you will end up being absorbed by your biggest competitor who is happy to do things in a constructive way and not just "wing it".
 

Mike S.

Happy to be Alive
Trusted Information Resource
If I had a nickel for every management complaint on these boards, I'd very wealthy. How do we know they "aren't on board?" Maybe they don't agree with the approach?
Many times we/they (upper management) often deserve all the complaints we/they get.

The OP said upper management has little to no interest in getting involved in the process. Maybe they don't agree with the approach as you said, but is it leadership to let someone flounder who is on the wrong path or not qualified to lead the effort?
 
Top Bottom