OK, folks, I'm looking for opinions...
Also see: RABQSA International - ISO/IEC 17024:2003 - Registrar Requirements
Also see: RABQSA International - ISO/IEC 17024:2003 - Registrar Requirements
ISO 17024 - New accreditation standard - What is it? Is it rational? Do we need this?
- Thread starter Marc
- Start date
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
I have not had a chance to read it yet, but there is an IAF Guidance Document to ISO 17024 available at https://www.compad.com.au/cms/iaf/workstation/upFiles/228543.IAF-GD24-2004_Guidance_on_ISO_17024_Pub.pdf
ISO/IEC 17024 has been available for awhile. It deals with the accreditation of training providers, such as ASQ.
I'm not sure which ABs are offering 17024, although perhaps ANSI or NATA. Whether it is neccessary is dependent on whether one believes having training providers held to a consistent standard is of value. Personally, I believe it has value. If anyone doubts that, just look at how many folks are offering training on auditing, measurement uncertainty, 6S, ISO 9001, and ISO/IEC 17025.....and consider how many are actually worth paying to attend.
Just my thoughts.
Hershal
I'm not sure which ABs are offering 17024, although perhaps ANSI or NATA. Whether it is neccessary is dependent on whether one believes having training providers held to a consistent standard is of value. Personally, I believe it has value. If anyone doubts that, just look at how many folks are offering training on auditing, measurement uncertainty, 6S, ISO 9001, and ISO/IEC 17025.....and consider how many are actually worth paying to attend.
Just my thoughts.
Hershal
A
AllanJ
Hershal said:
There are many purporting to offer training. There are some who actually do deliver training. What is sad to see is how audit training became cheapened and commoditized by the bandwagon brigade. While many standards are well intentioned and one can understand the arguments supporting their creation, in the particular instance of "training" is it not the case that the market will offer the finest ultimate certification that a particular organization delivers efficacious training? And, in an age of the internet and such places as the Cove, is there not an even more efficient forum for people to exchange their views on who actually meets the "standard" really required? It would seem to me when it comes to "training", recommendation and reference by satisfied customers is worth far more than a certificate issued by an anonymous body perhaps not fully au fait with the real needs of the marketplace.
But, I am open to persuasion, if sufficient evidence would demonstrate an unequivocal case for such standards.
Similar threads
