Got Quality?
Jim, I hope it does not come as a surprise to you, but I share most of your concerns.
Since 1994 (maybe Marc remembers), I have been voicing my concern (in other forums) over the fact that too much emphasis has been placed in the certification aspect of the "ISO 9000 movement".
There are a lot of problems associated with all facets of this subject:
- implementation,
- consulting,
- auditing,
- certification,
- accreditation, etc . . .
Unfortunately, I believe that 3rd-party auditing aspect, being one of the most visible parts, gets more scrutiny than others, thus the guidance document being developed.
One thing I wished would get changed in this whole process are the qualifications necessary for one to attain lead auditor status. I wish that lead auditors would be required to truly demonstrate their understanding of the BIG Q, and much less emphasis on their knowledge of tools associated with qc techniques. People that have worked for 30+ years in qc misperceiving quality as the result of inspection and test, brainwashed to the archaic approach to quality still make a good percentage of the "ISO 9000" - involved people, in the capacities of implementators, consultants and auditors. Obviously, some have been able to "see the light" and effectively make the transition from q to Q.