The Next version of ISO 9001 (2008 version) - Any news?

[Desara01]

Re: The Next version of ISO 9001 - Any news?

I don't think you're right about the number of procedures, but to steal a line from Shakespeare this revision will be "Much Ado About Nothing." The drafts so far have minor changes. Most registrars are being very forthright in saying retraining won't be required - I believe TS 176 has said the same but don't quote me on that - yet you already see the 29.95 heads up sessions from consulting companies. From what I've seen, the changes are very minor and unless you're brain dead you ought to be able to figure out the meaning.

When we were prepping for 9001:2000, I was with a major consulting firm (now I'm in the REAL WORLD) - and I taught classes all through the different drafts. The early drafts were great - I had hope!! It seriously got watered down over the course of the drafts and even after the DIS. So everyone, hang tight - Cheers

 

[Desara01]

Re: The Next version of ISO 9001 - Any news?

They are asking for training out of lack of understanding - tell them there is no substantial change and not to waste their money! That's our job. I wouldn't take a dime from a client who asked for retraining on this. I am sure you won't either

 

[Desara01]

Re: The Next version of ISO 9001 - Any news?

The question isn't whether it's reasonable to expect companies to buy a copy of the amended standard, but whether it was reasonable to force the issue by publishing a new edition that is, in practical terms, no different from its predecessor.

Far be it from me to cause trouble but I'm hearing the same thing from everyone here. We are the customers of this committee. We are users of this standard. Now the same old committee members will push this out with no value add, then tour the consulting circuit or write a book and make a bundle. I had to co-present with a couple of these guys, and I was quite frankly embarrassed (Mark censor me if you must but it's the truth!). TC 176 should do a better job of screening their committee members.

So what do we learn from this? Do we start a grass-roots effort to stop the nonsense with TC 176 and drive real improvement? How many hours were spent on this revision which says NOTHING??? Sorry - a little fired up. Quit smoking recently -

 

[tyker]

Re: The Next version of ISO 9001 - Any news?

I take your point, any training course should make it very clear that there are no new requirements, just amendments to the existing ones and you are right, if they didn't get it first time around, a half day course won't solve the problem.

As I understand it though, people are actually asking for these update courses so any training organisation is going to yes aren't they?

Yes, I agree.

 

[tyker]

Re: The Next version of ISO 9001 - Any news?

I agree, and think you're being a bit overly cynical, Tyker. I don't see a problem with an organisation offering a course - they've clearly laid out the contents. A couple of my contacts in CBs (credible people) said they've had demand for such courses. I'd prefer to credit other people with the same intelligence and sense as we claim for ourselves. ie, let them decide whether they need it and whether it has value for them.

I don't think in this case a course (let alone a whole day) is necessary - but that's me. And yes, I'd give that advice to my clients. But I won't judge what other people need nor castigate an organisation for offering a course in a free market.

Overly cynical is me, unfortunately.

I don't agree that the syllabus clearly sets out that there are no real changes to train.

Where I do agree with both you and Colpart is that training providers will answer a demand from the market place, but what's the root cause of that demand?

Is it a lack of effective communication concerning the absence of change in ISO 9001?

Is it that the 2008 standard should never have been created, just treated as a minor amendment to the 2000 version?

Is it that some are genuinely concerned that they never implemented the 2000 changes properly and want a second go? (Some of the comments from Colpart and Paul Simpson might support that view). If so, other courses would be more appropriate.

I've tried to give up cynicism but TC 176 makes it difficult.

 

[Helmut Jilling]

Re: The Next version of ISO 9001 - Any news?

The question isn't whether it's reasonable to expect companies to buy a copy of the amended standard, but whether it was reasonable to force the issue by publishing a new edition that is, in practical terms, no different from its predecessor.

Oh, I agree with the general premise that the clarifications could have been handled with an advisory. However, that would cut into ISO's income form a new standard which I assume is used to support their continued operations.

My comment was directed toward Tyker's comment about not buying a copy of the new standard. I think that is unreasonable for a certified company. One copy at least should be acquired by all.

PS: I like the new quote in your profile...

 

[tyker]

Re: The Next version of ISO 9001 - Any news?

My comment was directed toward Tyker's comment about not buying a copy of the new standard. I think that is unreasonable for a certified company. One copy at least should be acquired by all.

...

Sadly, I think most companies will buy a copy.

However, I have the year 2000 standard and have fully implemented its requirements, I have the FDIS, I have lots of other info on the changes.

Clearly you believe it would be a good thing for me to have a copy of the new standard but if you were my external auditor, would you issue a nonconformity if I didn't have it?

 

[Helmut Jilling]

Re: The Next version of ISO 9001 - Any news?

Sadly, I think most companies will buy a copy.

However, I have the year 2000 standard and have fully implemented its requirements, I have the FDIS, I have lots of other info on the changes.

Clearly you believe it would be a good thing for me to have a copy of the new standard but if you were my external auditor, would you issue a nonconformity if I didn't have it?

Your argument is that the information you have will allow you to meet the requirements. Yes, it probably could, if it is not defined as a controlled document in your QMS.

My argument is you are going to a lot of trouble to save $40. What are you communicating to your management and personnel about your "commitment" toward ISO and continual improvement. What are you inferring as to the value and importance of it? How do you think new people and new auditors will feel about a company too cheap to drop $40?

I could go on, but you get the gist of my view. I don't think an established company has to buy 50 copies and send people to upgrade training. But ISO moves on and I think you need to also.

Whether I would write an NC depends on how effective your implementation is, but I would put it at better than 50% chance.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: The Next version of ISO 9001 - Any news?

Your argument is that the information you have will allow you to meet the requirements. Yes, it probably could, if it is not defined as a controlled document in your QMS.

My argument is you are going to a lot of trouble to save $40. What are you communicating to your management and personnel about your "commitment" toward ISO and continual improvement. What are you inferring as to the value and importance of it? How do you think new people and new auditors will feel about a company too cheap to drop $40?

I could go on, but you get the gist of my view. I don't think an established company has to buy 50 copies and send people to upgrade training. But ISO moves on and I think you need to also.

Whether I would write an NC depends on how effective your implementation is, but I would put it at better than 50% chance.

Do you normally ask to see the auditee's copy of the standard? I don't want to go off on a tangent here because there's there's another discussion thread dedicated to the topic, but I'm curious.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Throwing a curve ball

would you issue a nonconformity if I didn't have it?

Note that one of the "clarifications" brought by ISO 9001:2008 has to do with the control of external origin documents:

f) to ensure that documents of external origin determined by the organization to be necessary for the planning and operation of the quality management system are identified and their distribution controlled, and

Based on all the official and public information related to ISO 9001:2008, I believe one can make a case that they don't need a copy.