ISO 9001 News ISO 9001:2025 - What should be changed in the next Edition of ISO 9001? - REVISION PROCEEDING- August 2023

[Dr. IJ Arora]

Example Irrelevant complaints
- Training Institution give customer satisfaction questionnaire to member. After, Training Institution review feedback of poor service complaints related to coffee time. Member want extend 15 minutes to an hour
- My flight is delayed and re-schedule for 4 hours. Based on airline procedure, they shall provide snack/meal for passenger. Then, I complaint to airline to provide my full refund because I have an urgent meeting, so I can arrange my closest flight schedule

Thanks

Your examples do not show the irrelevance? I am not sure of your question? My thought is you please consider the relevant clauses of the standard and then see how they can help your interpretation. 8.2.1c requires you to obtain customer complaints. 9.2.1 strengthens the requirement, and requires the organization to assess customer perceptions (positive or negative). It is in 9.1.3 the standard requires analysis. it is 9.1.3.d that action is called to see "..implemented effectively." My point being the follow up or as you classify relevant and irrelevant is a decision for the organization. The follow up necessary or not necessary is a decision the organization has to make.

 

[John Broomfield]

Are you suggesting these complaints are irrelevant to the organization or the customer or both?

Wanting a much longer coffee break seems more of a suggestion than a complaint. A mischievous suggestion perhaps but not treated as irrelevant if the training organization is to develop it relationship with its customers.

Airlines operate to internationally agreed rules to compensate customers for a four hour delay. Demanding a full refund to book a replacement flight leaving immediately seems most unlikely to succeed. But this service failure remains relevant to the passenger, the meeting and the airline. That may be why airlines provide service reliability data to prospective bookers of tickets. Unreliable flights may demand a pre-meeting overnight stay.

We should be willing to learn from all customer feedback. Dismissing some feedback as irrelevant may stop such learning.

 

[Jim Wynne]

We should be willing to learn from all customer feedback. Dismissing some feedback as irrelevant may stop such learning.

Although I don't think the standard should be changed in this regard, perhaps the distinction would be better stated as "reasonable" and "unreasonable." Instances of the latter variety happen all the time. When an unreasonable complaint is received, sometimes the best you can do is to thank the customer for chiming in, explain why the complaint won't be acted upon, and move on.

 

[John Broomfield]

Indeed, managing customer expectations with frank exchanges is part of building and maintaining the relationship.

 

[Pancho]

Indeed, managing customer expectations with frank exchanges is part of building and maintaining the relationship.

And incorporating a way to manage such expectations into the relevant process would be a valid and desirable corrective action for complaints that might, on a first blush, look "irrelevant". But how could anyone come up with such corrective action if the complaints were dismissed as "irrelevant"?

 

[Gun46]

My point being the follow up or as you classify relevant and irrelevant is a decision for the organization. The follow up necessary or not necessary is a decision the organization has to make.

Dr. IJ Arora,
So Relevant or irrelevant shall be determined by objective perception of organization it self to clarify customer feedback. If organization think it irrelevant, they will not follow up customer feedback or just say thank for customer.

 

[Gun46]

Are you suggesting these complaints are irrelevant to the organization or the customer or both?

I think it's irrelevant for customer to make a complaint to organization cause of very subjective. Later, Organization is not required to follow up a customer if complaints is categorized as irrelevant (organization's perceptive).

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Dr. IJ Arora,
So Relevant or irrelevant shall be determined by objective perception of organization it self to clarify customer feedback. If organization think it irrelevant, they will not follow up customer feedback or just say thank for customer.

Correct. There is nothing in the current version of ISO 9001 that would force an organization to take action on an spurious negative feedback from a customer. At most, they could acknowledge the receipt of the feedback.

 

[Dr. IJ Arora]

Dr. IJ Arora,
So Relevant or irrelevant shall be determined by objective perception of organization it self to clarify customer feedback. If organization think it irrelevant, they will not follow up customer feedback or just say thank for customer.

My thought is use all inputs from customer as appropriate. Then those that are not applicable can be closed. So in effect what you are saying is correct.

 

[Big Jim]

TC 176 / SC2 should follow relevant ISO 9001 principles/requirements in making the revision, including the following:
1. As per ISO 9001:2015 Section 4.2, they should understand the need and expectation of organizations that follow ISO 9001 for a clear and helpful standard.
2. As per ISO 9001:2015 Section 5.1.2 c, the top management of TC 176 / SC2 should ensure that the focus on enhancing customer satisfaction is maintained. It would be helpful if they also monitor customer satisfaction per section 9.1.2 and analyze data per 9.1.3 to help them in focusing on enhancing satisfaction and making changes that will improve customer satisfaction.
3. As per ISO 9001:2015 Section 7.1.6, they should ensure that they have the necessary knowledge to write a good standard. This should include gathering knowledge from customers (standards users) and incorporating the knowledge of standards users in how the standard is written. For subjects where the committee lacks sufficient knowledge (such as knowledge management and risk management), they should refrain from writing requirements or they should acquire sufficient knowledge.
4. As per ISO 9001:2015 Section 7.2, they should determine the necessary competence for standard writers and ensure that only competent personnel are involved in writing the standard.
5. As per ISO 9001:2015 Section 8.2.2, they should ensure that they can meet the claims that ISO makes about ISO 9001. Currently, ISO's website page for ISO 9001 claims that "Using ISO 9001:2015 helps ensure that customers get consistent, good quality products and services, which in turn brings many business benefits." Considering the recent decline in ISO 9001 certifications, and the significant user dissatisfaction with ISO 9001:2015, it is dubious that ISO 9001:2015 "brings many business benefits" - large numbers of businesses don't normally drop something which is bringing them many benefits. Either TC 176 / SC2 should write a useful standard which "brings many business benefits" or ISO should revise its claims to something more accurate, such as "ISO 9001 certification can help an organization to make sales to organizations which require external providers to have ISO 9001 certification."
6. Perhaps most importantly, as per ISO 9001:2015 Sections 8.3.3 - 8.3.5, TC 176 / SC2 should consider the functional / performance requirement for the standard that it be clear, unambiguous, and auditable, and should verify that the finished standard is clear, unambiguous, and auditable.

What? You expect the people in the ivory to follow their own dictates? What a thought!