A
Alienyst
Observing over the last few years the changes that have taken place in the company I work for, the new version of ISO and its changes, I have noticed that there seems to be two distinct sides:
1. Tool - the one who sees the quality system as a means and really wants to do a good job. The procedures, systems, processes, all documented, give them the tools for seeking ways of improvement on their own. (I have a lot of these and am always getting requests for review of changes and document revisions).
2. Weapon - the one who sees ISO as the enemy since it is ISO that is making them do all this work (which, by the way, they are getting paid to do and should be doing anyway as a matter of good business practice. I think it is just the fact that there is a 'procedure' now that they perceive 'tells' them what to do they resist - I have too many of these unfortunately). These are the ones who use ISO as a weapon. For example: 'Show me where ISO says I have to do that!' Usually it is not ISO, in fact it should never be ISO. It should be the Quality System - internally created. (I perceive this attitude as a direct show of disrespect, but that may just be me).
Of course there are many other categories and sub-categories. But these two types seem to stand out.
1. Tool - the one who sees the quality system as a means and really wants to do a good job. The procedures, systems, processes, all documented, give them the tools for seeking ways of improvement on their own. (I have a lot of these and am always getting requests for review of changes and document revisions).
2. Weapon - the one who sees ISO as the enemy since it is ISO that is making them do all this work (which, by the way, they are getting paid to do and should be doing anyway as a matter of good business practice. I think it is just the fact that there is a 'procedure' now that they perceive 'tells' them what to do they resist - I have too many of these unfortunately). These are the ones who use ISO as a weapon. For example: 'Show me where ISO says I have to do that!' Usually it is not ISO, in fact it should never be ISO. It should be the Quality System - internally created. (I perceive this attitude as a direct show of disrespect, but that may just be me).
Of course there are many other categories and sub-categories. But these two types seem to stand out.
Last edited by a moderator: