ISO 9001 News ISO 9001:2015 Amendment 1 Published - Determination of Climate Change Relevance * Poll added May 2024

[Sidney Vianna]

Some “quality philosophers” are conflating business continuity with climate change, trying to decipher exactly this inept decision.

It would be deemed a joke, if it wasn’t for the unnecessary pain and aggravation of registrants. And, with the current pool of 3rd party auditors out there, we should be prepared to hear some horror stories of auditors gone wild on climate change.

 

[Randy]

And, with the current pool of 3rd party auditors out there, we should be prepared to hear some horror stories of auditors gone wild on climate change.

Shoot there are a ton of environmental auditors out there that shouldn't do climate change because they're only "shake-and-bake" from taking a Lead course.

 

[Enghabashy]

most of long lists of recommendations & opportunities of improvements for the certification bodies will transfer from ISO 14001 audits reports to ISO 9001 audit reports ; ISO 9001 auditors have now extended great job for addressing findings ' without touchable objectives

 

[chris1price]

I'd like to think it is an early April Fool or a scam.

 

[Dazzur]

IS anyone able to summarise?
I'm unable to access the ISO website for some reason

 

[Paul Simpson]

Some “quality philosophers” are conflating business continuity with climate change, trying to decipher exactly this inept decision.

It would be deemed a joke, if it wasn’t for the unnecessary pain and aggravation of registrants. And, with the current pool of 3rd party auditors out there, we should be prepared to hear some horror stories of auditors gone wild on climate change.

The irony of being trolled by the owner of a LinkedIn '... no trolls allowed' group is not lost on me.

You can either sit on the sidelines alternately throwing rocks and gnashing teeth or you can get involved and try and provide some clarity and/or guidance. I'll let others decide.

 

[jmech]

https://iaf.nu/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/IAF-ISO-Joint-Communique-_2024F.pdf

From this communique:

Certification Bodies should already be ensuring that all internal and external issues have been determined by the organization as relevant or not and if so, considered in the development and effectiveness of the management system(s), as required by clauses 4.1 and 4.2.

Note that this statement in the communique is misstating the requirement in in ISO 9001:2015 4.1, which is:

The organization shall determine external and internal issues that are relevant to its purpose and its strategic direction and that affect its ability to achieve the intended result(s) of its quality management system.
The organization shall monitor and review information about these external and internal issues.

The ISO 9001 requirement is for the organization to determine relevant issues. The communique is claiming that the organization is required to determine whether all issues are relevant or not - all issues are an infinite number that no organization can consider. This is a significant distinction and ignoring this is the key to ISO's false claim that this is "a clarification rather than a new requirement".

From this communique:

Therefore, upon publication, certification bodies should include the new text in their auditing of the organization and its context. As with normal practice, where a certified organization cannot demonstrate that all external and internal issues that have been determined as relevant, including Climate Change, have been considered, a suitable finding should be raised.

The communique requires that this new requirement be included in audits from the date of publication. As explained above, this is a new requirement. The requirement in 4.1 is for organizations to determine relevant issues; not to consider issues. An organization for which climate change is not an issue that is "relevant to its purpose and its strategic direction and that affect its ability to achieve the intended result(s) of its quality management system" previously was not required to be able to show that it considered climate change; now it is required to provide evidence that it "determined" whether it is relevant.

 

[The Cycle Guy]

IS anyone able to summarise?
I'm unable to access the ISO website for some reason

It's a very short amendment. The organization shall determine whether climate change is a relevant issue. Relevant interested parties can have requirements related to climate change. That's all.

 

[Mike S.]

If I create a problem for my customers, should I then brag when I give them advice on how to deal with said problem?

Maybe ISO missed an important opportunity in not requiring us to consider whether or not the recent increase in sightings of UAP's (unidentified aerial phenomena) will effect our ability to achieve the intended results of the management system. I believe we can have about as much effect on that risk as climate change.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

The ISO 9001 requirement is for the organization to determine relevant issues. The communique is claiming that the organization is required to determine whether all issues are relevant or not - all issues are an infinite number that no organization can consider. This is a significant distinction and ignoring this is the key to ISO's false claim that this is "a clarification rather than a new requirement".

Please don’t confuse the mass with facts and reasoned arguments. The TC police might come after you too.

This amendment and the preposterous reason behind it just shows what happens when people live in their little protected space, bubble and echo chamber. They really think they are doing something positive that will contribute to mitigate climate change. Oh well…