Interesting Discussion ISO 9001 - Snake Oil? A discussion of the validity/value of ISO 9001
- Thread starter Marc
- Start date
rogerpenna
Quite Involved in Discussions
If it was still pinned, we can hardly call it "ressurrect". I would guess mods decided new entries answering the question the thread proposes were still welcome. Imho, somewhat different from a thread in page 100.
I am not sure where I said we were sophisticated. I admitted that yes, we were probably somewhat dysfunctional.
And that we needed or liked ISO to keep things in order.
the purpose is answering the question asked by the thread. It's self explanatory really.
the thread asks if ISO is snake oil Second answer in the thread imho describes a situation where we fit in.
What was the purpose of anyone stating anything in this thread? Same as mine, I guess. And again, thread was pinned, which imho indicates new entries to the question were welcomed.
A
asheshsaraf
Re: ISO 9001 - Snake Oil?
Thank you very much Marc. I appreciate the help.
Thank you very much Marc. I appreciate the help.
The OP question is regarding ISO 9001, NOT certification. I cannot now follow your line of answering since it appears to conflate Certification, with ISO 9001 as a basis for a QMS. Until it's clear that the answer is specifically about the implementation of a QMS which uses ISO 9001 requirements as the model, meaningful debate/discussion will be fruitless. Certification is a separate subject entirely.
I think you're being overly critical. Seems clear he feels iso9001 is useful, not snake oil.
Welcome Ken_M. I am very critical - when critical means the same as evaluative, analytical, interpretative, expository, explanatory. Too many people, for the last 30 years, have - and continue - to conflate the implementation of an ISO 9001-based QMS with the certification of same. What's your understanding?
Not sure what you mean by "understanding". I understand the difference between implementing a quality system based on ISO9K and achieving certification.
What's important, isn't whether you obtain certification or not, it's whether you understand the intent and can effectively apply it to your organization. There are many companies that get certified because they need that piece of paper and focus too much on paperwork and passing audits, rather than applying the principles to their business.
Companies that implement it to improve, regardless of certification are more likely to benefit from it. Although I'm sure there are some that still just want to use it as a marketing tool and don't really understand many of the principles.
So...
It's not clear to me where you stand regarding the thread topic. Is it that ISO9k is NOT snake oil but the certification process is snake oil?
If so, I think you have to consider why Roger's company is getting certified vs why many others do. Those that just want the cert to hang in the lobby focus on passing the audit and will push the auditors away from anything that might result in a finding or an observation. Those that want to improve as a company will welcome findings as opportunities to improve as a company.
The OP is about ISO 9001. It doesn't mention certification. The use of ISO 9001 as the basis for a QMS isn't "snake oil". However, many, even recent posts throw certification into the mix and take the thread off course...
The question is way too simplistic to reveal anything worthwhile.
A. ISO 9001 is a standard that specifies requirements for process-based business management systems so they deliver confidence that customer requirements will be fulfilled.
B. Quality professionals used to tag-on an ISO 9001 compliant QMS to try to deliver quality assurance but it often failed to win the competition for top management’s attention with the organization’s business management system.
C. Even some accredited registrars were complicit in this charade but gradually all five parties (quality professionals, top managers, registrars, accreditation authorities and ISO/TC 176) are changing quickly enough (we hope) to enable systems that comply with ISO 9001 to earn and keep an excellent reputation.
Beyond these five parties, business schools tend to underplay the importance of social responsibility and systems for determining and satisfying the needs of customers, employees, shareholders and other interested parties.
A. ISO 9001 is a standard that specifies requirements for process-based business management systems so they deliver confidence that customer requirements will be fulfilled.
B. Quality professionals used to tag-on an ISO 9001 compliant QMS to try to deliver quality assurance but it often failed to win the competition for top management’s attention with the organization’s business management system.
C. Even some accredited registrars were complicit in this charade but gradually all five parties (quality professionals, top managers, registrars, accreditation authorities and ISO/TC 176) are changing quickly enough (we hope) to enable systems that comply with ISO 9001 to earn and keep an excellent reputation.
Beyond these five parties, business schools tend to underplay the importance of social responsibility and systems for determining and satisfying the needs of customers, employees, shareholders and other interested parties.
John, is there any evidence of this change that could be shared? While some people and organizations have always tried to uphold the intent of the standard and certification, the overwhelming pressure to commoditize the management system certification sector has been driving the market in the downward spiral towards the bottom.
Back in 2006, Mr. Simon Feary stated this:
Unfortunately, the people and organizations that want management system certification to mean something are in the minority.
To revert this trend, it would take some serious disruptive intervention. Something like is happening in the Notified Body sphere, where, due to some very public failures, and the fact that Notification is a REGULATED ACTIVITY, the NB's are being forced to rethink their approach and ensure competence of their personnel, the performance of unscheduled audits, etc...It is creating some significant disruption, especially in the Medical Device arena and we have several threads here in The Cove about that.
Fortunately and unfortunately, management system certification is NOT a regulated activity, allowing charlatans and unscrupulous people to co-exist in the same space with serious and professional practitioners. Until SOMETHING is done to revert that, the commodity mindset will promote all the possible shortcuts towards certification without associated confidence - the definition of quintessential nonconforming certification.
Last edited:
Similar threads
