Some Phyllis thoughts:
Subject: Re: ISO 9001 Now - or Wait for ISO 2000 /../Naish
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 14:57:08 -0600
From: ISO Standards Discussion
From: PNaish
Subject: Re: ISO 9001 Now - or Wait for ISO 2000 /../Naish
Ralph,
You are right about the registrars probably not auditing to the 1994 standard after the release of the new version. But then again I think this shows that the registrars are not customer oriented and do not listen to the customer.
If the customer wants to stay with 1994 why can't they? If as a customer I am willing to pay you to come in and audit against something that you previously did should I be allowed to have you come audit me.
If I use the fact that continuous improvement is always good and the old should not be done any more then we would have no repair parts for anything that has been replaced by a newer more improved version. While I know there are companies that do not support older versions of products it forces users to buy new even if the old one is still the best solution for the user.
I for one think it is time that ISO realized that while the new standard is good for many (and maybe even most if I believe what you say) there are some out there that the new is not an improvement and requires time and effort beyond what is good for their particular business.
As to the many complaints about the old standard not matching current business, I do not understand how that can be true. If it did not, how is it that all the companies that have been registered have managed their business with it. Even the automotive industry patterned their version after it with adjustments they felt they needed for their business. And as I understand it they are not changing to the 2000 version. So how can it be better for all if one major business segment is saying they are staying with the old version plus their requirements. I would think if it is so much better that they would jump at the chance to go to the new version.
As far as listening to complaints from those who are registered, why is it that the ISO committee refused to listen to people who want the standard not to include continuous improvement? If you look at the original poll that was taken before the first draft you will find that over 50% did not want it in the new standard even though they thought continuous improvement was good. I guess they don't really know what they want and since there are people on the committee that know better than the people responding to the poll it should be in there.
Don't get me wrong about continuous improvement I think it is a good thing. I am just tired of hearing that this is what everyone asked for when you look at the poll results of those selected by the committee for input. There were some other areas that were marginal as well. I guess the committee would rather listen to itself than those who use it.
Even the poll was not a representative sample. If you look at the sizes of the companies that were polled you will see that it is not a sound demographic sample. There were a disproportionate number of large companies represented. The small to medium small companies which make up the larger segment of companies in the world were disproportionately not represented. And I believe that the committees involved have the same demographics as does the poll. I wonder if a poll was done cross sectional for all the registered companies that takes into account the size of the company and gives equal weight to each company if the results would be the same.
Yes small companies were asked to input into the draft if they were on line and heard about it or had someone tell them about the option. However, there was nothing sent by anyone from the registrars offices nor from the registration bodies asking for any kind of input. But then again what do small companies know. They just have to go with the flow as they say. So big companies on the committee (some of whom don't even work in an ISO environment) will continue to dictate how ISO should look. And the small companies will determine if they need to continue to be registered or not as the "ISO fad" wanes off into the sunset.
It is also interesting that there are numerous companies out there telling everyone that they need to get ready for the 2000 version now and are training people to it. This is again ironic since the draft itself says not to implement to it as it is still in draft. I guess the trainers know how it is going to be interpreted and that it is not going to have any more changes to it. And the poor companies who do not know any different are spending their money to be educated to the new standard before it is released.
Phyllis
Subject: Re: ISO 9001 Now - or Wait for ISO 2000 /../Naish
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 14:57:08 -0600
From: ISO Standards Discussion
From: PNaish
Subject: Re: ISO 9001 Now - or Wait for ISO 2000 /../Naish
Ralph,
You are right about the registrars probably not auditing to the 1994 standard after the release of the new version. But then again I think this shows that the registrars are not customer oriented and do not listen to the customer.
If the customer wants to stay with 1994 why can't they? If as a customer I am willing to pay you to come in and audit against something that you previously did should I be allowed to have you come audit me.
If I use the fact that continuous improvement is always good and the old should not be done any more then we would have no repair parts for anything that has been replaced by a newer more improved version. While I know there are companies that do not support older versions of products it forces users to buy new even if the old one is still the best solution for the user.
I for one think it is time that ISO realized that while the new standard is good for many (and maybe even most if I believe what you say) there are some out there that the new is not an improvement and requires time and effort beyond what is good for their particular business.
As to the many complaints about the old standard not matching current business, I do not understand how that can be true. If it did not, how is it that all the companies that have been registered have managed their business with it. Even the automotive industry patterned their version after it with adjustments they felt they needed for their business. And as I understand it they are not changing to the 2000 version. So how can it be better for all if one major business segment is saying they are staying with the old version plus their requirements. I would think if it is so much better that they would jump at the chance to go to the new version.
As far as listening to complaints from those who are registered, why is it that the ISO committee refused to listen to people who want the standard not to include continuous improvement? If you look at the original poll that was taken before the first draft you will find that over 50% did not want it in the new standard even though they thought continuous improvement was good. I guess they don't really know what they want and since there are people on the committee that know better than the people responding to the poll it should be in there.
Don't get me wrong about continuous improvement I think it is a good thing. I am just tired of hearing that this is what everyone asked for when you look at the poll results of those selected by the committee for input. There were some other areas that were marginal as well. I guess the committee would rather listen to itself than those who use it.
Even the poll was not a representative sample. If you look at the sizes of the companies that were polled you will see that it is not a sound demographic sample. There were a disproportionate number of large companies represented. The small to medium small companies which make up the larger segment of companies in the world were disproportionately not represented. And I believe that the committees involved have the same demographics as does the poll. I wonder if a poll was done cross sectional for all the registered companies that takes into account the size of the company and gives equal weight to each company if the results would be the same.
Yes small companies were asked to input into the draft if they were on line and heard about it or had someone tell them about the option. However, there was nothing sent by anyone from the registrars offices nor from the registration bodies asking for any kind of input. But then again what do small companies know. They just have to go with the flow as they say. So big companies on the committee (some of whom don't even work in an ISO environment) will continue to dictate how ISO should look. And the small companies will determine if they need to continue to be registered or not as the "ISO fad" wanes off into the sunset.
It is also interesting that there are numerous companies out there telling everyone that they need to get ready for the 2000 version now and are training people to it. This is again ironic since the draft itself says not to implement to it as it is still in draft. I guess the trainers know how it is going to be interpreted and that it is not going to have any more changes to it. And the poor companies who do not know any different are spending their money to be educated to the new standard before it is released.
Phyllis