ISO 9001 - Gigantic waste or Beneficial? Why does ISO 9001 exist? Got data/facts?

[qualitytrec]

I think a big part of the problem with ISO is that it along with ALL of the other Quality Standards has such a small pool of truely qualified people to implement, comunicate and maintain the systems in the businesses being required to conform. by qualified I mean having some grasp of the quality guru's philosophies. And because of this many companies hire who ever is willing to perform a job they are likely not qualified for in order to try to meet the mandate supplied by their customer. This is how I got into the field and I have no formal training in this. It has all been OJT learn as you go. I do not know many of the guru's many of you casually spit out as if they were some relative or friend or movie star. Juran, Deming, and Ishikawa (the fishbone dude in case I spelled it wrong) are the ones I have some knowledge about but I have read very little by them more about them or about their ideas written by others. I suspect that many here are in the same boat.
I have met so many people in this field that are unqulified "experts" that think because they took a class for a day or two they have it, that are really only qualified to pick grass or collect cans it makes me sick. The problem is not the concepts of ISO or other QSystems but the lack of truely knowledgable people to work in the field. JMO
Mark

 

[Craig H.]

I think a big part of the problem with ISO is that it along with ALL of the other Quality Standards has such a small pool of truely qualified people to implement, comunicate and maintain the systems in the businesses being required to conform. by qualified I mean having some grasp of the quality guru's philosophies. And because of this many companies hire who ever is willing to perform a job they are likely not qualified for in order to try to meet the mandate supplied by their customer. This is how I got into the field and I have no formal training in this. It has all been OJT learn as you go. I do not know many of the guru's many of you casually spit out as if they were some relative or friend or movie star. Juran, Deming, and Ishikawa (the fishbone dude in case I spelled it wrong) are the ones I have some knowledge about but I have read very little by them more about them or about their ideas written by others. I suspect that many here are in the same boat.
I have met so many people in this field that are unqulified "experts" that think because they took a class for a day or two they have it, that are really only qualified to pick grass or collect cans it makes me sick. The problem is not the concepts of ISO or other QSystems but the lack of truely knowledgable people to work in the field. JMO
Mark

Mark, I agree. But, it is not only book sense that makes it - it is the APPLICATION of these ideas that is the key, and that is the reason I, and so many others (I believe, anyway) do not like the "one size fits all" approach. Sure, knowing about the tools is important, but there is no substitute, IMO, for seeing how and why things actually work.
ISO 9000? Just a tool. Fishbone diagram? Just a tool, etc, etc.

Its the proper, and successful, application of these tools that is important.

 

[Greg B]

I think a big part of the problem with ISO is that it along with ALL of the other Quality Standards has such a small pool of truely qualified people to implement, comunicate and maintain the systems in the businesses being required to conform. by qualified I mean having some grasp of the quality guru's philosophies. And because of this many companies hire who ever is willing to perform a job they are likely not qualified for in order to try to meet the mandate supplied by their customer. This is how I got into the field and I have no formal training in this. It has all been OJT learn as you go. I do not know many of the guru's many of you casually spit out as if they were some relative or friend or movie star. Juran, Deming, and Ishikawa (the fishbone dude in case I spelled it wrong) are the ones I have some knowledge about but I have read very little by them more about them or about their ideas written by others. I suspect that many here are in the same boat.
I have met so many people in this field that are unqulified "experts" that think because they took a class for a day or two they have it, that are really only qualified to pick grass or collect cans it makes me sick. The problem is not the concepts of ISO or other QSystems but the lack of truely knowledgable people to work in the field. JMO
Mark

Mark,

I MUST disagree. Just because someone knows a lot about some GURU it does NOT mean they can implement a Quality, Environment or Safety System nor does it mean they can run a business with Good Sensible Business Practises. Many of the better QA (systems) people I have met thru my networks have not had any formal 'Quality' training other than a brief one day induction to ISO and a two day internal auditors course (that is all the training I received). I have learned most of my 'QA' stuff from networking, Life & Business skills and even the cove. Please do not confuse ISO with the Quality Gurus. IMO the Gurus are espousing more about metrics and certain aspects of a Business System they are not necessarily talking about ISO and in many of the experts cases ISO was not around when they started selling their theories. As Wes stated it used to be Mill Specs etc. IMHO any Business Graduate or a Person with a good business head can run a QA system because as I stated in my last post it should be a reflection of YOUR BUSINESS not a regurgitation of the STANDARD or a GURU's VISION. Don't let Quality Control TECHNIQUES or FAD TOOLS Cloud your view of what Quality Assurance is about. It is a BIT of Paper that certifies to your Customer that you run your business in line with a given set of business guidelines. What it does not do is tell them if you actually make a GOOD product and IMHO that ids the major drawback - Not of ISO but of the registrar system of audits.

 

[qualitytrec]

Greg,
I guess I was not clear because I agree with what I understand you to be saying. What I am trying to say is that most of the people I know in this line of work ( auditors, Quality staff, consultants ) do not have a clue what they are doing and are flying by the seat of their pants. I really do not care if they know Juran or the others but it IMO would be beneficial to understand some of the philosophies that drive the quality world. And IMO it would be very good if they had any kind of problem solving skills.
I was nominated for my job simply because I was the only one to complete college ( BRE religious degree ). I was not ready for what I was thrown into but now it doesn't bother me that much because most people in it are not any better qualified than me and most, in my not so humble opinion, do not have as much common sense. I have been doing this now for about ten years and I am still amazed at how some people make $50.00hr for "consulting", just because they have an opinion and got one or two places their flag.
Mark

 

[Greg B]

Greg,
I guess I was not clear because I agree with what I understand you to be saying. What I am trying to say is that most of the people I know in this line of work ( auditors, Quality staff, consultants ) do not have a clue what they are doing and are flying by the seat of their pants. I really do not care if they know Juran or the others but it IMO would be beneficial to understand some of the philosophies that drive the quality world. And IMO it would be very good if they had any kind of problem solving skills.
I was nominated for my job simply because I was the only one to complete college ( BRE religious degree ). I was not ready for what I was thrown into but now it doesn't bother me that much because most people in it are not any better qualified than me and most, in my not so humble opinion, do not have as much common sense. I have been doing this now for about ten years and I am still amazed at how some people make $50.00hr for "consulting", just because they have an opinion and got one or two places their flag.
Mark

Good comeback Mark, well explained. I apologise if I had misread your previous post and I may have come across a bit strong. FYI: My expertise is in Aircraft Avionics (started with Milspec stuff) and my Diplomas are in Engineering and Management.

 

[J Oliphant]

strange twist of events

so we have my original 3 complaints of ISO

It is the most efficient use of resources
NOt includes this or overemphasizes that
registration is a non value added activity

and add 2 more:
People implementing are not competent
The ISO std added no profound knowledge to the quality movement

and in all these- 'people implementing are not competent' resonates??

I will protest markasmith, craig, and greg. Isn't this like blaming the worker for quality problems (Deming)? you could consider implementing a management directive to be a process. in that process quality workers are like production. In your own businesses surely you would not automatically blame workers for every problem, so I think we should NOT automatically blame quality workers when there efforts fall short. These professionals have their limitations too; Quality efforts must clearly be supported and must be supported when they hit the inevitable obstacle in other departments.
Just the other day, actually quality management was rebuffed from on high, here when they protested that a department signed off for training on procedures for over 90days. management told the ISO dept that this dept was too busy to be expected to achieve this in 90days. oh and it probably would have taken 1-2 hours max for the dept to do the training. Is this the quality workers, fault too??
those of you whom are quality managers, surely as difficult as it is to understand the standard and the 'best' way to do things--is that really as hard as trying to get support from management/ other departments?

I say blame the system first, and leave well-intentioned people alone.
if you hold to you opinion and feel urge to engage in friendly debate, please post.

I hope I am not too strong, I'm enjoying this thread. it's probably redundant, but interesting. I realize I may be simplifying others point of view-- personally, I think ISO is neither a gigantic waste or necessarily beneficial. So I'm willing to debate a little with those that post whom definitely think ISO is a 'gigantic' waste.

 

[Carl Keller]

The question is kind of like saying "Is a College Degree a Gigantic waste, or beneficial?"

A college degree should be an indicator that you have proven a certain degree of proficiency in your field.

If put to good use, it is a win-win for all.

If maintained by the holder and revised as needed, it is kept current with the pace of the business world.

Some choose to put it to the best use and actually go BEYOND the requirements.

Certain criteria MUST be met to acheive it. No "interpretation" of whether or not you passed or failed each course.

But....

Right now ISO 9001 is a gigantic waste, here is why:

What if you receive the degree regardless of your grades?

As long as pay for your classes and show up (sometimes), you get the certificate.

Those who chose to actually participate, work hard and keep current would benefit from it more, but in the end, the guy or gal that did not bother will have the same diploma.

THAT is the current state of ISO.

EVERYONE gets the same cert, regardless of how much they actually subscribe to it.

Until the standard is treated like a TRUE standard....

Yes, ISO is a gigantic waste.

Carl-

 

[Rachel]

[in reference to a college/uni degree] Certain criteria MUST be met to acheive it. No "interpretation" of whether or not you passed or failed each course.

Carl - not always, I'm afraid.
Allow me to introduce you to the bell curve - I and many of my friends rode it right through "ChE 038 - Numerical Methods and Modelling".

Just a little comic relief...
Cheers,
-R.

 

[Carl Keller]

Rachel,

Nothing wrong with a bell curve.

You know what they call someone who had the lowest passing grade on their medical boards?

Doctor

Carl-

 

[RoxaneB]

What if you receive the degree regardless of your grades?

As long as pay for your classes and show up (sometimes), you get the certificate.

Ummm...where exactly did you go to school?!?! And, in high school, why was I never told about schools that give out degrees even if I didn't go to class?!?!

Those who chose to actually participate, work hard and keep current would benefit from it more, but in the end, the guy or gal that did not bother will have the same diploma.

And some people do better on tests, some people have to hold down a job while going to school to pay for tuition, and some, to be honest, are just natually great on the academic side. I, for one, do not place much stock in grades...there is always more to a story than what you first read.

But trying to apply your analogy to the real business world and ISO 9001:2000, for those companies that work hard (no...not hard....work smart, implement ISO in the spirit in which it was intended, and have a generally well-founded business plan (plus provide a product/service that society wants) will be around for a long time.

EVERYONE gets the same cert, regardless of how much they actually subscribe to it.

Who is being hurt by this? Company A who has a great Business Management System will survive for a long time, is adaptable and in touch with their Customers and ISO provides them just another means of keeping their Customers happy. Company B who has a nice piece of paper on the wall, stays in business because they met the requirements of their Customer who said "You need to be ISO 9001:2000 registered."

Until the standard is treated like a TRUE standard....

What is a TRUE standard? Would like ISO 9001:200 to explicitly tell us what a Purchasing is supposed to do and how it is to do it and with which tools and who to include and everything like that? Isn't that called a procedure?