ISO 9001:2000 Transition Poll Discrepancy?

RoxaneB

Change Agent and Data Storyteller
Super Moderator
#1
Poll Discrepancy?

Well now, isn't this interesting....

Now that the deadline has passed, of the 31 people who have currently voted on their ISO 9001:2000 status, 74.19% have successfully transitioned.

And the thread asking if it was worth it, of the 38 people who have currently voted, only 47.37% have said yes.

That's quite a difference...I would have thought (even hoped) that the numbers would be a bit closer.

For those of you have voted in both polls, I'm curious as to why your organization transitioned if it was felt is wasn't worth it. And what is required, in your opintion to make it beneficial.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
E

energy

#2
Just a guess

RCBeyette said:
Well now, isn't this interesting....

That's quite a difference...I would have thought (even hoped) that the numbers would be a bit closer.

For those of you have voted in both polls, I'm curious as to why your organization transitioned if it was felt is wasn't worth it. And what is required, in your opintion to make it beneficial.
Could be that they see no difference in how the company is run...before and after. Could be that the amount of orders stayed the same. Could be the consumption of valuable resources, just to carry the banner. Could be that they see nothing beneficial about it.

As there has been no responses so far to this thread, I thought I would help jump start it. Is it really a discrepancy because people may think it was a waste of time and money? Should they embrace the notion that it's the greatest thing that a company can achieve? ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
R

Raptorwild

#3
energy said:
Could be that they see no difference in how the company is run...before and after. Could be that the amount of orders stayed the same. Could be the consumption of valuable resources, just to carry the banner. Could be that they see nothing beneficial about it.

As there has been responses so far to this thread, I thought I would help jump start it. Is it really a discrepancy because people may think it was a waste of time and money? Should they embrace the notion that it's the greatest thing that a company can achieve? ;)
I am just one person here at my company who thinks certification was worth it. Not every one here may feel that way because of the amount of orders has not grown yet, and the consumption of very little resources has. I have seen ISO work for us in the way it holds everyone here accountable for their job in keeping them aware of their functions and activities. We pretty much did all of this stuff before ISO but the record keeping and verification activities were laxed. Now that our audit is over, I feel that I have to look over my shoulder whenever I go online to the cove! :vfunny: Now were back to if I am not doing assembly, inspection or other obvious functions, what am I doing? :)
If it were my money, I would do it because it is a good idea! :bigwave:
 
D

D.Scott

#4
Raptorwild said:
I am just one person here at my company who thinks certification was worth it. Not every one here may feel that way because of the amount of orders has not grown yet, and the consumption of very little resources has. I have seen ISO work for us in the way it holds everyone here accountable for their job in keeping them aware of their functions and activities. We pretty much did all of this stuff before ISO but the record keeping and verification activities were laxed. Now that our audit is over, I feel that I have to look over my shoulder whenever I go online to the cove! :vfunny: Now were back to if I am not doing assembly, inspection or other obvious functions, what am I doing? :)
If it were my money, I would do it because it is a good idea! :bigwave:
I sure can't argue with that but was the actual CERTIFICATION worth it? If you had put the QMS in and management buys in to it and everybody follows it, did the paper actually do anything? Did the registrar add anything? Would you feel the same satisfaction with the system if you were fully compliant but not certified?

Dave
 

RoxaneB

Change Agent and Data Storyteller
Super Moderator
#5
energy said:
Could be that they see no difference in how the company is run...before and after. Could be that the amount of orders stayed the same. Could be the consumption of valuable resources, just to carry the banner. Could be that they see nothing beneficial about it.
The fact that there was no adverse affects to transitioning would almost make it seem worth while, would it not? If the Customer base remains the status quo, if your organization continues to do business, is that not beneficial?

energy said:
As there has been responses so far to this thread, I thought I would help jump start it. Is it really a discrepancy because people may think it was a waste of time and money? Should they embrace the notion that it's the greatest thing that a company can achieve?
If we are the ones who in the positions responsible for implementing/maintaining/improveing, we should be the strongest advocates of it. I'm saddened if many of us are holding jobs we do not believe in.
 
E

energy

#6
Laxity

Raptorwild said:
I have seen ISO work for us in the way it holds everyone here accountable for their job in keeping them aware of their functions and activities. We pretty much did all of this stuff before ISO but the record keeping and verification activities were laxed. Now that our audit is over, I feel that I have to look over my shoulder whenever I go online to the cove! Now were back to if I am not doing assembly, inspection or other obvious functions, what am I doing?
If it were my money, I would do it because it is a good idea! :bigwave:
Raptor, you say you were pretty much doing all this stuff before ISO. But they were lax. The one thing in your favor now is that twice a year they will be back. Did the "laxity" cause the business to suffer? Do you think you would have gone out of business without ISO? As for looking over shoulder while visiting the Cove, I must say when I'm posting, I have to be quick because of that blue guy spinning around the Thank you pole and that purple guy laughing and jumping up and down can draw attention! :vfunny: I don't believe ISO was intended to turn a company into a Gulag. ;) If it were my money, I'd give Christmas bonuses. :bigwave:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
E

energy

#7
The view may not be the same

RCBeyette said:
I'm saddened if many of us are holding jobs we do not believe in.
I believe that most everybody has jobs that they believe in. They just may not believe in the flavor of the year! :confused:
 

Mike S.

Happy to be Alive
Trusted Information Resource
#8
RCBeyette said:
The fact that there was no adverse affects to transitioning would almost make it seem worth while, would it not? If the Customer base remains the status quo, if your organization continues to do business, is that not beneficial?

If we are the ones who in the positions responsible for implementing/maintaining/improveing, we should be the strongest advocates of it. I'm saddened if many of us are holding jobs we do not believe in.
Just because there are no adverse effects it is therefore worthwhile? I disagree. If everything was basically status-quo after thousands of dollars in cash and God knows how many man-hours were spent on ISO, I must wonder what true tangible benefits I might have gotten if this time and money were applied elsewhere.

Just because someone says they think ISO certification was not worthwhile for their company or was neutral, doesn't mean they do not believe in their job. The QM or ISO coordinator is certainly not solely responsible for whether or not a company gets a benefit from it, and may be overruled on issues that would have made a big difference, and likely has many other duties as well. We all know some companies are only doing the minimum to get the cert and others are doing the best they can. If the QM is doing the tasks assigned to him/her to the best of their ability I think they can and should "believe in" their job.

JMO.
 
D

D.Scott

#9
energy said:
I believe that most everybody has jobs that they believe in. They just may not believe in the flavor of the year! :confused:
I'm with Energy on this one. I have been in the quality field for a long time. I believe very much in my job and take my responsibilities very seriously. As Management Rep. I feel a responsibility not only to maintain the quality system but also to ensure the company I work for is represented fairly in the overall quality arena. I have a duty to know the standards we profess to live by and I have a duty to protect the company's intrest from undue or unfair imposition of requirements. If I see an employee "milking" the system internally, it is my job to fix the problem. If I see an external "milking", that too is my job to fix the problem (although realistically it is more like I bring it to management's attention for a decision). I also feel a duty to my fellow quality professionals to answer a question to the best of my ability and not hold back because I happen to be in charge of that department. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and waddles - it is probably a duck - so why not say so.

Dave
 
R

Rob Nix

#10
Isn't it true that there is no cut and dried answer to whether the ISO standards, and their upgrades, are beneficial or not. That is way to broad a question.

Each of us has probably found in all of these standards the following: 1) silly requirements that make no sense at all. So we come up with some cheap way to meet the requirement and put up with it; 2) a number of requirements that are just plain common sense "We've been doing that for years, and would continue to do so, with or without a standard" (this is why many prefer compliance over registration); 3) requirements that make sense for some companies, but not for ours. It requires real creative license to make it fit; and 4) A requirement or two that actually is new to the company and would likely help it if implemented.

It would be better if the standards were like a buffet (smorgasbord for Claes) where we could choose what works for each of us.

But if we're talking about the standards as a whole, then there are really only two questions:

1) Would we lose key customers (sales, money, market share) if we were not registered?

2) Would we be less productive, less effecient, and have higher costs if we were not registered (or did not implement the system)?
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
R Key Process Indicators (KPIs) for ISO 9001:2000-certified Service Organization ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
P Internal Audit for ISO 9001:2000 vs. Internal Audit for OHSAS 18001:2007 Internal Auditing 4
H ISO 9001:2000 Certificate - Original approval date 18 July 1995 and valid until 2012 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 27
E ISO 9001:2000 transition to ISO 9001:2008 - Do I have to rewrite the QMS? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 22
M Advantage between ISO 9001:2000 vs ISO 9001:2008 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
A Quitting ISO 9001:2000 - Necessary Changes to product literature, logos, etc. ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 14
M Updating a Quality Manual from ISO 9001:2000 to ISO 9001:2008 Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 57
B Updating from ISO 9001:2000 to ISO 9001:2008 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
B Advice needed for ISO 9001:2000 update to 2008 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
K How to update from Procedure to Process - ISO 9001:2000 to ISO 9001:2008 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
F How much longer can a company declare registration to ISO 9001:2000? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 21
N ISO 9001: 2000 to ISO 9001: 2008 - How to change the documents & procedures? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
S Transition from ISO 9001:2000 to ISO 9001:2008 and TS 16949:2002 to TS 16949:2009 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
V ISO 9001:2000 to ISO 9001:2008 - Identification in meeting notes. ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 17
E Validity of ISO 9001:2000 Certificates - How to handle supplier ISO 9001 certificates ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
K Interpretation of the differences between ISO 9001: 2000 & 2008? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
Q How long is ISO 9001:2000 good for (valid) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
N ISO 9001:2000 version to ISO 9001:2008 - Necessary Document Revisions ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
Q ISO 9001:1994 Upgrading to ISO 9001:2000 or ISO 9001:2008? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
D Time frame for validity of ISO 9001:2000 Certifications IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
H Effectiveness of ISO 9001:2000 Implementation in small industrial organizations? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 29
J Is Version Change needed for ammending ISO 9001:2000 to 2008 Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 1
L ISO 9001:2000 vs. ISO 9001:2008 differences and concerns ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
R ISO 9001:2000 to ISO 9001:2008 Transition - Changing documentation ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 22
C Recertification for ISO 9001:2000 - framework ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 13
D Relationship between ISO 9001:2000 and EFQM ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
D Acquisition (Merger) of an ISO certified to ISO 9001:2000 company ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
A Is ISO 9001 Transition (from 2000 to 2008 version) Training Required? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 24
P Calibration - Clause 7.6 of ISO 9001:2000 - Is all this necessary? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 42
D To change or not to change? Our documents reference ISO 9001:2000 Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 31
A Registration to ISO 9001:2000 in 2009? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
S What are the consequences of having an expired ISO 9001:2000 Certificate ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
A A macro-process structure approach to auditing for ISO 9001:2000(8) General Auditing Discussions 19
B CNC Controls under ISO 9001:2000 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
Marc Summary of ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 9001:2008 Changes ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 166
A Brief discussion about ISO 9001:2000 clauses ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
K Advice on exclusion of 7.5.2 of the ISO 9001:2000 Standard ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
L ISO 9001:2000 and CMMI v1.2 Integration and Org Deployment ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 8
GStough REACH and ISO 9001:2000/13485:2003 - Never the Twain Shall Meet? RoHS, REACH, ELV, IMDS and Restricted Substances 4
S GAP Analysis for ISO 9001:2000 vs. ISO 13485:2003 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
D ISO 9001:2000 - Implementation in an Environmental Consulting Firm ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
K Getting started with ISO 9001:2000 Templates Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 18
Z Synchronizing two quality management systems: ISO 9001:2000 Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 5
J ISO 9001:2000 4.2.3- Quality Records, Production Travelers Records and Data - Quality, Legal and Other Evidence 9
C ISO 9001:2000 Certificate - How to have a 3 year validity instead of 1? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 15
N When will ISO 9001:2000 Certificates turn into ISO 9001:2008? General Auditing Discussions 11
J Should product brochures be controlled per ISO 9001:2000? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 2
I ISO 9001:2000 Recertification controls ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
J ISO 9001:2000 7.3.5 "Verification" and 7.3.6 "Validation"- Clarification ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 29
J Must you use an ISO 17025 lab in order to receive ISO 9001:2000 Certification ISO 17025 related Discussions 16

Similar threads

Top Bottom