From: ISO Standards Discussion
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 10:41:03 -0500
Subject: Re: Supplier Selection Criteria /../Isackson/Scalies
From: "Charley Scalies"
> It is painful to observe that many organizations are responding to the
> DIS in this manner. It speaks volumes about the semantically dreadful
> nature of this document that it brings exegesists, eschatologists and
> tea-leaf readers out of the quality closet. I personally cannot wait for
> the concordance. Can Quality wait much longer for its Martin Luther and a
> cathedral at Worms or perhaps Weehawken?
I knew I liked this guy!
BTW, I prefer Weehawken, because it has a ferry that will take me across the river Styx, AKA Hudson.
> Any firm that selects its suppliers with the concerns of its ISO
> Registrars uppermost is likely to go the way of Studebaker-Packard.
Remember, "Wheelbarrow" Johnny Studebaker said, "Always give the customer what he wants - but not too much or you'll go broke."
> A bit of ancient wisdom: Tofasto merubo lo tofasto.
> He who seeks too much finds nothing - Talmud
And that is exactly why I have concluded ISO9000:2000 is a very bad idea. It's not what it says, but what the "Experts" say it means.
Here's my advice - for whatever it's worth. If anyone thinks a portion of the new standard doesn't make good common sense or that someone's interpretation of it doesn't make good common sense, then somebody is reading it wrong. Or, if I can quote from one of my favorite burlesque routines:
Patient - "Doctor, Doctor, it hurts when I do this. What should I do?"
Doctor - "Stop doing that."
Charley Scalies
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 10:41:03 -0500
Subject: Re: Supplier Selection Criteria /../Isackson/Scalies
From: "Charley Scalies"
> It is painful to observe that many organizations are responding to the
> DIS in this manner. It speaks volumes about the semantically dreadful
> nature of this document that it brings exegesists, eschatologists and
> tea-leaf readers out of the quality closet. I personally cannot wait for
> the concordance. Can Quality wait much longer for its Martin Luther and a
> cathedral at Worms or perhaps Weehawken?
I knew I liked this guy!
BTW, I prefer Weehawken, because it has a ferry that will take me across the river Styx, AKA Hudson.
> Any firm that selects its suppliers with the concerns of its ISO
> Registrars uppermost is likely to go the way of Studebaker-Packard.
Remember, "Wheelbarrow" Johnny Studebaker said, "Always give the customer what he wants - but not too much or you'll go broke."
> A bit of ancient wisdom: Tofasto merubo lo tofasto.
> He who seeks too much finds nothing - Talmud
And that is exactly why I have concluded ISO9000:2000 is a very bad idea. It's not what it says, but what the "Experts" say it means.
Here's my advice - for whatever it's worth. If anyone thinks a portion of the new standard doesn't make good common sense or that someone's interpretation of it doesn't make good common sense, then somebody is reading it wrong. Or, if I can quote from one of my favorite burlesque routines:
Patient - "Doctor, Doctor, it hurts when I do this. What should I do?"
Doctor - "Stop doing that."
Charley Scalies