ISO9001:2008 - What a complete joke!

[AndyN]

Haven't seen this happen yet; perhaps others have but not in my experience. I have also addressed this with several customers without help other than they tell me it could be worse if we were on their watch list.

Again; if our quality and delivery was not up to customer requirements I can understand the additional audits by the customer; we work hard to maintain our performance but it doesn't seem to matter.

My gripe is the additional cost my company must put forth. If the AS/ISO Certs. are not good enough, along with our performance then why make it a requirement to be certified.

Jobs....:mg:

 

[tlonkey]

I was wondering if it might be due to a lack of confidence in the CB - some CBs have very little visibility in certain markets or their reputation is poor, so the customer will send in the troops.

Our CB is UL DQS Inc.. We have a valid certification and the customer's own scorecard shows our performance as excellent.

Not sure what else we could do to meet their requirements.

Again, my issue is with the extra cost my company has to put out during these additional audits.

 

[abd_sg]

silentrunning...agree!

 

[AndyN]

Our CB is UL DQS Inc.. We have a valid certification and the customer's own scorecard shows our performance as excellent.

Not sure what else we could do to meet their requirements.

Again, my issue is with the extra cost my company has to put out during these additional audits.

Put a line item in your quotes for the burden of 2nd party audits - a charge back if you like - see if the purchasing people are prepared to eat it!

 

[engr.post]

Guys, say what you will...

I think your expectations are a defence of ISO9001, yet some balance has been provided.

ISO9001 is a complete and total joke...

I think you're using this phrase to perhaps mean it doesn't appear to be working as I hoped, or you were led to believe it promised more, or you thought it was intended to take care of something or other better than it has.

Many make this into so much more than it has to be...

Many people here and elsewhere have written about e.g. misapplications and misinterpretations.

QM's hide behind the BS which allows them to seem important..

Not everyone and not all the time and not for the wrong reasons all the time. Maybe some power seekers may use ISO9001's 'authority' wrongly. Standards are useful foundations to lean against or build upon or work to, else we could have 'authority' vested more in the person or opinion (for example).

I cannot begin to tell you what kind of horse.... this is for a realistic standpoint...

Agree, if what you mean is that the reality is often never realised (e.g. with commitment to).

Lets see, first you pay the RO to come into you facility and you really expect them to fail you? Come on!...

Could you be talking about impartiality? Conflict of interests? Auditors do have a difficult role to execute. Financial auditors e.g. have a similar challenge. QMS auditors do 'fail you' by encouraging your organisation to meet ISO9001 and then meeting your edit of ISO9001. Are there firm challenges? Generally, auditors I think appreciate the business environment, other factors, and have some insight of what's achievable.

This entire process is complete pig pile. This is one of the biggest jokes to ever take place...

Disagree, with the entire process comment. Also, I have to defend the affront to pigs who are extremely unwasteful animals.

Heres to you China! Even your chicken feet are registared to the ISO9001:2008 standards

Chicken feet are a delicacy for some diners I found on a visit to Chinatown London.

I have empathy to the comments as understood/described above. There is something wanting. Maybe it's a more determined grasping of the spirit of our intentions, developed in for e.g. ISO9000 (present company generally excluded). Maybe it is a diatribe. OP?

 

[Colin]

Well Jack, you certainly got people fired up with this post! - well done for that.

I agree with much of what has been said regarding the interpretation and intent when applying the standard and I agree that certification can be achieved with a system which is far from ideal.

On the other hand, if all suppliers were good and told the truth about everything they did, there would be little need for management systems standards being imposed upon them would there? Lets be honest, how many suppliers 'sneak' work through which they know does not meet spec, or how many service providers deliver late and blame it on the traffic or the weather or whatever?

This is a 2 way street and customers are entitled to do whatever (within reason) they need to do in order to get what they asked/paid for.

 

[lennon121]

Deploy the requirements
Minimize waste
enjoy the benefits and increased profits

When deployed properly in your business the benefits of ISO 9001 are endless.

Remember the purpose of this standard is to continuously improve the business.

Take it as you will however I will always be laughing at the millions of pounds profit I make every year because of it!

 

[vanputten]

I think one big problem is the misapplication of the concept of 3rd party. Who are the 3 parties? The organization. The conformity assessor. The customer. The 3rd party audits are done on behalf of the customer. But the organization being audited pays the assessor.

To me, this is one major issue in the actual or perceived value of 3rd party audits. The benefactor of the registration / certification is really the customer. Organizations get audited to have independent and objective evidence that they meet certain requirements. But the auditee is paying the auditor. So of course there is gaming between the audited organization and the auditor.

If the customer paid the auditors for the audits and reports, I think the conformity assessment industry might be more valid.

I agree that getting ISO 9001 certification does not seem to be of value to the customers when they do on site, 2nd party audits to the same requirements anyway.

I believe that the ISO 9001 industry is more of a joke than not. The goal is the grade (the certificate) and not the reduction in variation or improvement of the product. The goal is some piece of paper indicating conformance.

 

[David Hartman]

jackweed13, I've noticed that this is the third day since your posting and you have not entered into the discourse any further. Could it be that you statements were of a "pot-stirring" nature? If so, it appears that you were successful.

I personally, would have to agree with the statements that have been made regarding the value is in how you implement the standards. If your implementation is designed to provide you with a continuously improving business management process, you could do much worse than using the guidelines provided by ISO-9001, but if your implementation is just to gain certification there will probably be little value received from it.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

If the customer paid the auditors for the audits and reports, I think the conformity assessment industry might be more valid.

If an organization has hundreds of customers, which one would pay for the audit fees?

We have countless discussions on the value of management system conformity assessment practices in this forum.

I've said numerous times and will repeat once again: the only sustainable way to provide credibility to management system certificates are for the users of the certificates to be and keep all parties accountable to the process. Only accountability will restore/maintain confidence in the process.

If certain CB's ran the risk of becoming irrelevant because the marketplace did not trust their services, they might change their modus operandi of selling certificates, instead of performing conformity assessment services.

If the users of certificates would punish or reward registrars for their ability to weed out non-certifiable systems, behaviors would change.

When we all know that different registrars have hugely diverse business models and professional seriousness, why do we keep equating certification as an attribute, rather than a variable? With so many "less-than-serious" CB's out there, why is it that the majority of folks don't believe that customer should influence supplier's choice of CB's?

Until the users of certificates become serious, knowledgeable and demand accountability of their suppliers and supplier's registrars, we are promoting the path of least resistance towards certification. Until we change that, you are providing incentives to those who benefit financially from making this whole process a joke, because they are not concerned with the long term viability and sustainability of management system certification. Just the quick and fast buck. And those, who don't keep their supplier registrar's accountable are enablers of irresponsible behavior.