Reasons for the Decline of ISO 9001 Registrations in North America (circa 2010)

[Randy]

Re: What are the Reasons for the Decline of ISO 9001 Registrations in North America?

I'm not surprised really! Often - I don't know if this post is an example - but the quality system created often gives no value to management. We see examples each and every day of documents which are more about ISO references, format, headings and overly complex numberings that the actual content and its value to management as a means of controlling business process. Added to which we see ineffective internal audits following ISO checklists and complaints about corrective actions not being taken seriously.

Of course, there's a big difference between maintaining a system and the value it brings and obtaining/maintaining 3rd party certification - which is what this thread is about....

Yep

Aaaaaaaaaaargh!

 

[Stijloor]

Re: What are the Reasons for the Decline of ISO 9001 Registrations in North America?

<snip>A company with poor quality can certainly get certified as long as it is following its process documents.

Well, not really. That's stating it way too simplistic. The effectiveness of the quality system including customer satisfaction must be assessed. Ineffectiveness and customer complaints (poor quality) are indicative of an ineffective QMS. As an auditor, I can not recommend such an organization for registration.

Stijloor.

 

[tyker]

Re: What are the Reasons for the Decline of ISO 9001 Registrations in North America?

Back in my youth, I remember the start of 3rd party registration which was initially justified as a means of reducing the number of 2nd party audits. Every organization, back then, seemed to have a Quality Manager and a Chief Inspector and a Deputy Chief Inspector and a host of Senior Inspectors all of whom spent their time hosting external auditors. Or so it seemed. The onset of the 3rd party brigade did indeed bring about a reduction in the number of SQA visits which allowed their former hosts to be deemed unnecessary along with their former visitors. Many of the displaced SQA people and ex Quality Managers moved to the CBs as external auditors. Many organisations saved on their employment costs and value was duly added.

Now in my dotage, I recently attended an event at which I was informed, by the head of one of the largest multinational CBs (a Cove advertiser, no less) that their auditors were experts in "best practice" and would bring this to their clients during assessments as added value. Unfortunately, the means by which these auditors were trained in "best practice" was a bit vague and the means by which their expertise in "best practice" evaluated totally obscure. The only clear fact that emerged was that their auditors were expected to identify novel and effective initiatives in the organizations they visited and pass these initiatives on as "best practice" to organizations lacking the imagination to come up with the ideas for themselves. It seems that, provided the source of this "best practice" was not identified by name, it's not considered a breach of confidentiality but is actually "adding value".

I thought it was industrial espionage but it seems I'm just behind the times. Nevertheless, I won't be inviting one of these "best practitioners" into my factory any time soon. My customers don't seem to care that my company isn't registered so what benefit would I gain from registration? Answer that and you're on the way to answering the initial question of this interesting thread.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Re: What are the Reasons for the Decline of ISO 9001 Registrations in North America?

I recently attended an event at which I was informed, by the head of one of the largest multinational CBs (a Cove advertiser, no less) that their auditors were experts in "best practice" and would bring this to their clients during assessments as added value. Unfortunately, the means by which these auditors were trained in "best practice" was a bit vague and the means by which their expertise in "best practice" evaluated totally obscure.

Chances are, this was the same Certification Body that was taken to court in the UK several years ago for alleged misleading advertisement practices. If I remember correctly it was John Seddon who took them to court for advertising that ISO 9001 certification would lead to higher productivity, efficiency, profitability, etc...

 

[AndyN]

Re: What are the Reasons for the Decline of ISO 9001 Registrations in North America?

I could not agree more. A company with poor quality can certainly get certified as long as it is following its process documents. The focus is too often on the rules rather than the quality.

That may have been true in the days of the mantra "say what you do, do what you say" that someone at DuPont coined early on in the history of the rush to get certified in the USA...actually, ISO has NEVER been about "say what you do..." because it forces many organizations to put practices in place they never did before!

Today, the effectiveness of a system is not in the eye of the auditor! It is in the data management present as part of their review and conclusions of the suitability and effectiveness of their system!

Those who still cling to the mantra are well advised to get past that, or risk going the way of dinosaurs!

 

[JaneB]

Re: What are the Reasons for the Decline of ISO 9001 Registrations in North America?

I could not agree more. A company with poor quality can certainly get certified as long as it is following its process documents. The focus is too often on the rules rather than the quality.

I think leaping from a single anecdotal example (as quoted re. the layoffs) to making a general statement such as the one above is drawing a very, very long bow, to say the least.

A sweeping generalisation on the basis of a single example.

Hmmm ... now, what was that principle about making decisions based on fact?

 

[JaneB]

Re: What are the Reasons for the Decline of ISO 9001 Registrations in North America?

Thanks for the examples. I see now that "adding value" means "doing something useful," and I accept that idea. I think it's more than a little disturbing, however, that CBs feel they have to trumpet the idea that their auditors actually do what they're being paid to do.

A little unfair, I think Jim. And 'trumpeting'? Where? Who?

CB's are one of the stakeholders of the process, but definitely not the only one.

How right you are.

And it isn't uncommon to see people complain about 'our bad quality system' or 'how our auditor did a bad job' in here... but when advised to take it up, to push back, to act like an informed but not a satisfied customer, it also isn't uncommon to see people write back with the 'well, I'd like to, but...' or 'that isn't possible because'...

As long as organizations don't keep their CBs and respective auditors accountable to the intent of the process, they themselves are not being accountable either. As long as customers don't keep their suppliers's CB's accountable to the intent of the accredited management system certification process, they are not accountable either. As long as the accreditation bodies don't weed out the unscrupulous CB's they are not accountable either.

Only accountability and actions at all levels can make this a value adding, sustainable effort. [cliche'] If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. [/cliche']

Yes indeed. I agree strongly. And with the truism.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: What are the Reasons for the Decline of ISO 9001 Registrations in North America?

I think leaping from a single anecdotal example (as quoted re. the layoffs) to making a general statement such as the one above is drawing a very, very long bow, to say the least.

A sweeping generalisation on the basis of a single example.

Hmmm ... now, what was that principle about making decisions based on fact?

That's right. You need at least two examples (a la Sidney's two above) before a sweeping generalization can be considered reliable.

 

[7Sigma]

Re: What are the Reasons for the Decline of ISO 9001 Registrations in North America?

Thanks for the laugh tyker! Sounds like you were onto them from the start. I believe the acronym for "best practice" is BS. As an engineer with one of the AT&T local operating companies who developed several technological improvements, you can bet that I am not going to share my company's best practices with anyone for fear of losing my competitive advantage. It is difficult to take a so-called expert seriously when I hear them say something like "best practice".

I am new here and was browsing this site a bit when I came across this gem page:

Ooops!! Forum rules prevents me from including a web page link - - even on this same site.

Well if search this elsmar site for bingo, you will find the page. If you have not seen it yet, it is worth checking out.

 

[7Sigma]

Re: What are the Reasons for the Decline of ISO 9001 Registrations in North America?

I think leaping from a single anecdotal example (as quoted re. the layoffs) to making a general statement such as the one above is drawing a very, very long bow, to say the least.

A sweeping generalisation on the basis of a single example.

Hmmm ... now, what was that principle about making decisions based on fact?

Hmmm. I did not give an example; however, I do know of one instance that I was involved with where this was true. The service supplier was required by contract to gain ISO 9001 certification. The goal was to get certified, not improve quality. The goal was met; however, I cannot say that quality was ever improved. AndyN said that does not happen now that the certifying auditors are evaluating the system differently. That is good news but that is not how it was just five years ago.

If I made a "sweeping generalisation", that was not my intent. If a company seeks ISO certification to satisfy a contract requirement, then they may also be expected to drop it when a contract no longer requires the certification.