I would like to say the site owner…nice site.
After reading the responses, all of which I enjoyed reading – I feel compelled to make a few more statements. Most all standards are documents, and -needless to say - documents do not “comply” with themselves. I said I would refuse to “get registered” – not that I would not implement the standard. In my mind, the standard is nothing more than “good” quality assurance practices codified. Expected results of the application of most all standards is given by the minimum, not the maximum, result of that standard’s application. If one actually believes that it is a given company’s responsibility to properly implement the standard, not an auditor’s responsibility to properly audit that company – then it follows that we do not need regulatory entities such as the EPA, FDA, USDA, FCC, FAA, OSHA, or NRC. I did not include RAB in the above abbreviated list since it is painfully clear that they do not regulate, oversee, ensure, or even comply with anything.
I certainly do not expect an auditor to know everything about a given company…I absolutely expect an individual employed to audit anything to have the background necessary to properly audit what he/she is being paid to audit. To suggest, as registrars often do, that it is too difficult to find individuals with ‘x’, ‘y’, and ‘z’ backgrounds is really laughable. Unless the company in question works on a top secret project in the middle of area 51…this shortage of persons with appropriate backgrounds simply does not exist. However, what does it matter? RAB maintains that it will only investigate concerns raised by “the entity” that has been audited. So, how many concerns about illegitimate recommendations for registration do you think RAB has received? My guess…two.
My solution to this problem is that an ISO registration certificate clearly state:
This certifies that x company has implemented the ISO9001year to an unknown degree – ranging from not at all to fully.