New IASG 3rd Edition Interpretations

J

Joe Ptak

#1
I just received a fax from our registrar which mentioned the newly-issued IASG QS-9000 3rd Edition Sanctioned Interpretations of January 22, 1999. Anyone hear anything about this, or if they are available anywhere on the web?
 
B

Bryon C Simmons

#2
Really?????? News to me......I didnt know there were going to be any more Interpretations published by IASG.

I would like to get me a copy too.......if anybody knows where or how.

Bryon
 
B

Bryon C Simmons

#4
No kidding, Marc. THe merry-go-round is spinning faster....is it ever gonna stop?


This should be interesting.

Bryon
 

Marc

Retired Old Goat
Staff member
Admin
#5
rdparris wrote:
I personally attended the big 3 roll out meeting in Detroit held by the top taskforce members with suppliers and was told (no rumor) that there would be no need for more interpretations. That there would be no interpretations.
Well, I see you're new to this game!

NOTE!!!

No more interpretations exist!
He he he! Yeah, big 3, right. No more need for interpretations.... Chuckle chuckle! Tee hee hee! Haw haw haw![/b]

Note to dparris: I'm not aiming this 'humour' at you. I just wanted to use the quote because of the context!

[This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 20 August 1999).]
 
R

Roger Eastin

#6
I guess your faith in the QS9K standard is better than mine. I never see Sanctioned Interpretations going away. QS attempts to look like a generic spec like ISO, but it is actually very prescriptive. Along with that comes Sanctioned Interpretations. Look at how many questions (cumulative) we get in this Q&A forum for QS-stuff compared to ISO. In fact, I think we ain't seen nothin' yet if QS continues to get more prescriptive! Maybe the ISO light will go off in the Big 3 think tank and QS will get simpler! Somehow I don't think so........
 

Marc

Retired Old Goat
Staff member
Admin
#7
Yeah - I know. It was just that rumour that I fell for (interpretations by AISG [or whatever] were extinct). Nope - I have no 'faith' in QS9000. QS9000 is a customer requirement, not an international spec. Because of my military manufacturing experience, I equate it to the vague (sometimes) or simply confusing or just plain stupid (often) Mil-Specs I used to work with.

Remember $500 hammers? On the other hand there 'some' good points to QS9000. One is my business increases (he he he
)

No, really, QS has good points. Just poorly written, attempts to address a wide spectrum of industries but is too narrow to do so, etc., etc.

And I just LOVE the copyright on the interpretations!
 
R

rdparris

#8
In response to Marc's comments about the interpretations. I personally attended the big 3 roll out meeting in Detroit held by the top taskforce members with suppliers and was told (no rumor) that there would be no need for more interpretations. That there would be no interpretations.

I just found out today that we're back into this circle again.

Am I management rep....or a lawyer just trying to keep up with ever variable laws?
 

Marc

Retired Old Goat
Staff member
Admin
#9
Am I management rep....or a lawyer just trying to keep up with ever variable laws?
Now that you mention it..... You're a lawyer!
(PLEASE... No "Call me a cab" "OK - You're a cab" jokes.)

Take a good look at <a href="http://Elsmar.com/obsolete/tis_me.html" target="blank">what I wrote</a> back when I set this site up.

AIAG, IASG, Plexus - it's not bribery and it may not technically be criminal, but it's usery. "You need our training! You need our books! You need 'certified' internal auditors! You need registration! You need to put Ford, GM and Chrysler FIRST!

However I will say, when a company chooses to court Ford, GM and Chrysler, their choice is to (attampt to) comply. The old 'You asked for it!'

Can you say:

"Moving Target"? "Vague"? "Interest Group"? "Conflict of Interest"? "Inflexible"? "Expensive"? "More 'Interpretations'"?

[This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 20 August 1999).]
 

Top Bottom