Hello Sidney/ John - it is good to have you both in the fray. One of the open posts, "The Evolution of Risk Management: Just Do It" by John Shortreed at 2008 International Risk Management Conference in Toronto is that the Standard is Not Certifiable, and along with definitions currently in ISO Guide 73, provides a format for assessing and managing the effect of uncertainty on objectives, aka planned arrangements.
Business owners and managers practice risk analysis on a daily basis and the question is, or will be, how will clients demonstrate a structured model in sufficient detail to satisfy a registrar without creating unworkable layers and processes?
The actual process of quantification while subjective is relatively straight forward, actually quite similar to
FMEA and self assessment for ISO 14001.
Viewed from the Customer, small and build-to-print shops are key supply links in a Lean - reduced inventory, dock-to-stock scenario who should generally limit their focus to the risk of failing to deliver or that of delivering incorrect or nonconforming product. This likely leads to assessing supplier risks and internal processes; and it could address business continuance issues such as disaster recovery and financial stability as well as labor and staffing.
Large organization, particularly those who include design, must expand the scope and their task is a good deal more robust.
Hopefully the AS9104 and AS9101 committees get the message and provide appropriate guidance for suppliers and registrars.
Chuck Doland