Should the billing process be part of ISO 9001:2008?

[michellemmm]

Everybody should always be on the lookout for opportunities for improvement, if that's the "paradigm." I didn't say that "OFI" is a euphemism per se; my remark was directed at Michellemm's statement that searching for OFI's is the purpose for internal audits. It's not. The purpose is to confirm that the system/process operates as designed. If someone has a great idea for improvement during the course of an audit, so much the better, but those kinds of things should be serendipitous.

Searching for OFI is my primary objective when I perform IA.

I have never seen a process that was designed "perfectly"...I have never seen a product that was designed "perfectly". I have never seen a process that was managed "perfectly" with perfect input and perfect output... and I have never seen a perfect system with perfect result... and I don't expect to see one either....

In an internal audit, I expect my internal auditors to challenge the effectiveness of every product, method, and process through process approach...You will be surprised how comprehensive the audits become when the climate of detecting or fault finding changes. One of my auditors during the last audit found 18 OFI's and 22 NC's when he was auditing a single process. The process was challenged for adequate planning, conformance, checking, and continual improvement. Yes, even people's role in the continual improvement was examined and it was later determined that the Management Rep (me) failed to adequately promote the CAR system. Therefore CAR was written on CA system.

I believe many are stuck in the world of activity auditing and have a difficulty transitioning to process approach.

I will be glad to read the book "who moved my cheese" again when others do as well.

 

[Helmut Jilling]

I never said to take the compliance away...I reversed the order.

Good. Perhaps I misunderstood post #68.

 

[michellemmm]

Good. Perhaps I misunderstood post #68.

Here is what I said on post number 68:

For IA, I reverse the order of the objectives you outlined. i.e. OFI ad then compliance.

Once again, I believe if an organization is concerned about "Conformance" with the "ISO/=>proven business practices", then there is something wrong with their QMS.

 

[ccochran]

I'm very late joining this discussion, but I'll toss in anyway. There are few processes that affect customer satisfaction more than billing. What gets customer more angry than an incorrect invoice? Almost nothing. Despite this fact, billing is usually one of the more scatter-brained functions in the organizations I visit, and it's hardly ever included within the scope of the QMS. Organizations are able to define their own system scopes, of course, but they miss a huge opportunity when they don't include billing.

Craig

 

[pinpin - 2009]

I'm very late joining this discussion, but I'll toss in anyway. There are few processes that affect customer satisfaction more than billing. What gets customer more angry than an incorrect invoice? Almost nothing. Despite this fact, billing is usually one of the more scatter-brained functions in the organizations I visit, and it's hardly ever included within the scope of the QMS. Organizations are able to define their own system scopes, of course, but they miss a huge opportunity when they don't include billing.

Craig

Agree....reason why most companies do not have this process documented and controlled thorugh monitoring and audit was simply because the Finance or Accounting or Billing functions were not involved in the establishment of the management systems. Many thought these functions are not within the scope of ISO/TS...and they thought it should not be the ISO/TS auditor's job to conduct audit at these areas because quality and financial audits are of two separate domain....and quality auditor is not competent and not suppose to audit in there....

 

[Sidney Vianna]

In the January issue of Quality Progress, an article by Lakshmi Tatikonda on a less costly billing process is available. He also shares his experience dealing with a large telecom organization.

Billing Disconnect
While completing this article, one of the major multinational telecommunications companies gave me a great real life field story. I was a customer of this company for more than 40 years and used its services for all phone calls. Sometime last February when I called India, I got the message, “International calls can’t be made from this number.” I thought this was a technical problem and would be corrected. The next day, I got the same message.
I called the company’s customer service, but the representative had no clue how to address the issue and connected me to another clueless person. After 40 frustrating minutes, I hung up. I called again the next day and encountered more clueless people. Finally, the sixth person I spoke to told me the company had cut my service because my bill was too large. I told them there had to be an error, but the representative could not provide any details about my bill, which I had not yet received. I decided to wait until the bill came to address the issue and until then used phone cards for international calls.
When the bill came, I was startled to see I was charged $7 per minute for calls to India. For many years, I had an international calling plan with a $1 flat fee per month, plus 30 cents per minute. When asked, I was told that was the old version of the company. This was the new version, and that is why I was charged $7 per minute.
No one could explain what this new and old system was about, why I was not told about it earlier, and why I should pay $7 per minute. After many hours of arguing, the customer service representative agreed to recalculate the bill and told me the amount I owed. I promptly sent a check for that amount with a note stating the error and what customer service told me to pay. I thought this was the end. I was wrong.
The next month, I received a much larger bill with a statement that the amount was overdue. This fiasco continued for several months. I also received a letter from the company’s accounts receivable (AR) department stating that unless I paid the overdue amount, my phone services would be cut off and my account given to a collection agency. I explained what happened to the AR representative, but she said she had no communication with the billing, cash receipts or customer service departments and insisted I pay the total billed amount or face having my service cut. Shortly after that, the company cut my long distance service.
Unable to resolve the issue with the company’s personnel, I sought the help of the Better Business Bureau (BBB). BBB took my complaint, agreed with my statement and contacted the company. A short time later, the company called me, apologized for the error and overcharges, credited the overcharges to my account and refunded the excess I paid.
By this time, annoyed with its arrogance and lack of respect for customers, I said goodbye to that company and chose another carrier as my phone service provider. Of course, it didn’t take long for me to receive several letters asking me to reconsider my decision, as well as discount coupons to rejoin.
The bottom line: The company demonstrated that its billing process was flawed and there was no communication between billing, cash receipts, customer service and accounts receivable. It overcharged, harassed and bullied me (I heard similar stories about the same company from many other people), wasted hours of my time and took four months to accept it made a mistake, only after the intervention of the BBB. In the end, the company lost a long-term, loyal customer. — L.T.

 

[tampk]

We need to consider following while considering inclusion of billing process:
a. How would it impact Quality Objectives
b. How would it impact customer satisfaction
c. How would it impact core money-making process
d. How would it impact internal performance

Just ponder ..

My answer is YES
Tariq A Majid

 

[Paul Simpson]

In the January issue of Quality Progress, an article by Lakshmi Tatikonda on a less costly billing process is available. He also shares his experience dealing with a large telecom organization.

This is a classic case of the customer communications process not working effectively:

The organization shall determine and implement effective arrangements for communicating with customers in relation to
a) product information,
b) enquiries, contracts or order handling, including amendments, and
c) customer feedback, including customer complaints.

If you change the billing structure it forms part of the contract - you have to tell your customer. It is too much of a stretch to say billing has to be part of 9k. As discussed before - if the process is causing a problem with satisfying customers it is "fair game" under corrective and preventive action.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

It is too much of a stretch to say billing has to be part of 9k.

Why? Very few processes have the same impact potential on customer satisfaction, compared to billing.

 

[Paul Simpson]

Why? Very few processes have the same impact potential on customer satisfaction, compared to billing.

Obviously I didn't explain myself well here!
The problem wasn't the billing process - for all we know it was an accurate bill (albeit based on an inaccurate set of rates).

Somewhere in their customer related processes they failed to communicate with their customer (7.2.3) about the change to rates - and probably earlier when they were planning the changes to their service delivery system (7.1) they didn't consider the implications on existing customers.

Or perhaps they did and the $$$$ signs blocked their view of customer satisfaction.

Anyway - hence my view that it doesn't support your campaign to get billing brought into 9k (something I neither agree with nor disagree).