Understanding accreditation, MoUs, certifications

Marcelo

Inactive Registered Visitor
#11
I'm still confused about it.

What do you mean by "it's primary goal is business"? By that do you mean these agencies' intent is:
- Serving manufacturers' business interests, by somehow facilitating testing and marketing?
OR
- Their own business interests, and it's all just creative new ways to make money, with questionable value?

The bottom-line concern for manufacturers is regulatory, so I don't see how these schemes, unless somehow tied to regulatory control, would have any reason to exist.

The (modern) certification in general (based on standards such as BS 5750 - ISO 9000) was created due to a simple business need - reduce the burden of inspection of suppliers. In a more general sense, the need was to show someone that my product met some requirement.

For a great historical overview, take a look at the attached file.

The certification "industry" was a obvious need to solve this problem, due to the possible conflict of interest of industries evaluating their own processes.

One interesting example is ISO/TS 16949. It was created by the the big automotive manufacturers for the same reason I mentioned above, to reduce the burden of their supplier inspection. This shifted the burden from the manufacturer to the supplier. The related certification scheme was also created, and after that, the big manufacturers simply said, "to work with me you will need to prove you comply with my quality standards, and the way to do this is to comply with this certification scheme".

Please note that the general "certification industry" nowadays is, in my opinion (and a lot of people think the same), a little rotten, because, between other factors, the certificate became for some simply a paper on the wall.

So

Why would a manufacturer need to seek out an accredited test-lab or certification body, unless the services they deliver are required for or facilitate regulatory needs?
As you might infer from the above, the answer is "because your client asks for it".
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Ronen E

Problem Solver
Staff member
Moderator
#12
it seems to still be good, otherwise it would not exist anymore.
Good for who?

From an evolutionary standpoint, the fact that something exists (or lasts) does not say it is "good" in any absolute way. It only means that it is fit for survival within a given context. I don't deny the fitness for survival of the current arrangement (I'd be a fool otherwise), but it may (and I bet it will) change in the long run because the industrial world changes all the time. Either way, in the meantime we should not assume it's "good" for a given party.

I've seen absurd cases where certification was required by bodies who did not understand what it stands for, and then such certificates were being presented by organizations that got them at the minimal possible investment, without adding value in the process and without actually believing that it would make any difference (except of course allowing the sale), and then the recipient being very happy and content without it's actual confidence being increased (including cases where eventual failures demonstrated the uselessness of the entire thing). So a lot was going on, and someone sure made a profit, but it was in fact completely parasitic. Except maybe that it helped some people sleep better at night. :lol:

Cheers,
Ronen.
 
Last edited:

Ronen E

Problem Solver
Staff member
Moderator
#13
the certificate became for some simply a paper on the wall.

(...)

As you might infer from the above, the answer is "because your client asks for it".
Exactly my point. So many clients require that "paper on the wall" simply because they've been brainwashed that it is "a good thing to have". Not by anyone in particular, it's just an influx from the business environment.
 

Mark Meer

Trusted Information Resource
#14
So many clients require that "paper on the wall" simply because they've been brainwashed that it is "a good thing to have". Not by anyone in particular, it's just an influx from the business environment.
Or perhaps by brilliant marketing.
...I'd be curious to know how much marketing is targeted towards consumers, in order to convince them that particular certification should be sought? Or that one certification is superior to another...

A good example from years ago was a customer that demanded a UL NRTL mark. They had somehow got the impression that a UL mark was the be-all-and-end-all of safety certification, and any other NRTL mark just wouldn't cut it...
 

Marcelo

Inactive Registered Visitor
#15
Good for who?

From an evolutionary standpoint, the fact that something exists (or lasts) does not say it is "good" in any absolute way. It only means that it is fit for survival within a given context. I don't deny the fitness for survival of the current arrangement (I'd be a fool otherwise), but it may (and I bet it will) change in the long run because the industrial world changes all the time. Either way, in the meantime we should not assume it's "good" for a given party.
The fact that a lot of organizations have no clue about certification does not negate the fact that there are organizations that understand certification and thus use them as a vantage standpoint. So I still think that it?s correct to state that certification is good.


I've seen absurd cases where certification was required by bodies who did not understand what it stands for, and then such certificates were being presented by organizations that got them at the minimal possible investment, without adding value in the process and without actually believing that it would make any difference (except of course allowing the sale), and then the recipient being very happy and content without it's actual confidence being increased (including cases where eventual failures demonstrated the uselessness of the entire thing). So a lot was going on, and someone sure made a profit, but it was in fact completely parasitic.
Very common nowadays, surely.

Except maybe that it helped some people sleep better at night
I don?t agree with this, but sometimes that?s all a organization need at a given time.
 

Marcelo

Inactive Registered Visitor
#16
Quote:

the certificate became for some simply a paper on the wall.

(...)

As you might infer from the above, the answer is "because your client asks for it".

Exactly my point. So many clients require that "paper on the wall" simply because they've been brainwashed that it is "a good thing to have". Not by anyone in particular, it's just an influx from the business environment.
I think the last part is a bit out of context, at least from the point of view of my comment, because I used the "because your client asks for it" to show the original need for certification separately from the regulatory need.

But I do agree that blindly asking for it and blindly thinking that it?s needed is part of the problem nowadays.

However, the fact that people play the game without knowing the rules is not exclusive to this business, right?
 
Last edited:

Marcelo

Inactive Registered Visitor
#17
Or perhaps by brilliant marketing.
...I'd be curious to know how much marketing is targeted towards consumers, in order to convince them that particular certification should be sought? Or that one certification is superior to another...
Yes, marketing is a big aspect (and terrorize the client with tales of problems on not having a certificate to a standard abound), but again, this is part of the game and not exclusive to this business.

A good example from years ago was a customer that demanded a UL NRTL mark. They had somehow got the impression that a UL mark was the be-all-and-end-all of safety certification, and any other NRTL mark just wouldn't cut it...
Not sure if that?s the case, but historically a UL NRTL mark IS the only one required by US regulations for some products - but this goes back to the intersection of certification and regulations.

Historically (and other people with more knowledge can correct me), UL was from a certain point of time the major US "safety" and "quality" evaluator as appointed by the US government - for example, certain components of electrical equipment MUST have a UL mark to be marketed in the US (and this comes from the NFPA). UL is now in a more general certification position, but their past is what made and still make them a priority in the US.
 

Mark Meer

Trusted Information Resource
#18
Slowly becoming clearer...

But I'm still having a tough time understanding the relationships, and grounds for mutual recognition of certifications. For example:

Test Lab A is an IECEE member CBTL listed as accredited by CNAS.
Test Lab B is also an IECEE CBTL, but accredited by A2LA.

(assume the same IEC standard is in the scope of their accreditations)

So the question is, what are the grounds for the mutual recognition of a CB-scheme test report issued by either of the above test labs, given that their accreditations come from different agencies (CNAS/A2LA). ..and these agencies appear related only by their memberships to IAF & ILAC?
 

Marcelo

Inactive Registered Visitor
#19
Test Lab A is an IECEE member CBTL listed as accredited by CNAS.
Test Lab B is also an IECEE CBTL, but accredited by A2LA.
I?m not sure why you are using different backgrounds here.

If Lab A and B are IECEE CBTLs, they were accredited by IECEE/CB-Scheme. The other don?t count for IECEE recognition.

So the question is, what are the grounds for the mutual recognition of a CB-scheme test report issued by either of the above test labs, given that their accreditations come from different agencies (CNAS/A2LA). ..and these agencies appear related only by their memberships to IAF & ILAC?
The same as above, they have mutual recognition inside the IECEE/CB-Scheme.
 

Mark Meer

Trusted Information Resource
#20
I?m not sure why you are using different backgrounds here.
If Lab A and B are IECEE CBTLs, they were accredited by IECEE/CB-Scheme. The other don?t count for IECEE recognition.
My source of confusion is the IECEE website.
If you go to the IECEE members page and lookup any CBTL, then click the "Show Details" button, you are given (among expected address, website..etc.) an "Accredited By" field. This field will list such agencies as A2LA or CNAS...

If these agencies are unrelated to the IECEE, then what does the "accredited by" field mean on the IECEE website?

NOTE: I think I'm following you. ...just finding these accreditation bodies on the IECEE site got me confused again.
Sorry if I'm:
:deadhorse:
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Q Understanding "free movement" for CE-marked products EU Medical Device Regulations 2
D High level understanding of EUDAMED EU Medical Device Regulations 3
A 60601-1 understanding of stationary device IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 0
N Help with basic understanding of Competence requirements ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
D Surface Roughness understanding Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 1
P Understanding DFMEA and PFMEA - Supplier Related IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 21
DuncanGibbons Understanding the applicability of Design of Experiments to the IQ OQ PQ qualification approach Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 5
B Measuring and monitoring equipment - Understanding which procedures to be compliant with ISO 13485 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
M Informational Health Canada has launched an e-Learning tool to aid in understanding the premarket regulatory requirements for medical devices in Canada Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
S Understanding UDI requirements - Class 2 medical device (hearing aids) 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 3
M Informational Understanding Costs And Risks For HFE Usability Studies — Part 1: Testing In-House Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
P Understanding FDA draft "Management of Cybersecurity in Medical Devices" Medical Information Technology, Medical Software and Health Informatics 3
J Properly understanding SPC - Newbie SPC questions Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 34
S Understanding control chart and measurement capability Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 2
P Minitab Data Analysis - Understanding if a Process is in Control or Not Using Minitab Software 2
R Understanding a few points on ISO 9001's Design and Development Planning ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
Z Understanding Cycle Time - Why the time of the other activities are left out Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 11
J Understanding ISO 9001:2015 - 10.3 Continual Improvement ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
J Understanding ISO9001:2015 - 8.3: Design and Development of Products and Services ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
E Root Cause Analysis - Is Insufficient Understanding an acceptable Root Cause? General Auditing Discussions 9
E Understanding of TS 16949 Clause 7.6.2 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 5
K Understanding IEC 60601-2-68 requirements ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
A Training material for interpretation & understanding Part 11 requirements 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
N Understanding the absolute uncertainty specification for a Fluke 5500A Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 3
N Understanding, Challenging & Approving Supplier Control Plans FMEA and Control Plans 7
M Definition Recommendations - Understanding "recommendations" and "recommended corrective action" Definitions, Acronyms, Abbreviations and Interpretations Listed Alphabetically 8
S Understanding UDI (Unique Device Identification) Other US Medical Device Regulations 10
T Understanding USP <1112> Water Activity as applicable to Medical Devices Other Medical Device and Orthopedic Related Topics 4
K Understanding Risk Management Requirements according to AS9100 AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 11
S MIL-HDBK-217 - Understanding the various Environmental Conditions Reliability Analysis - Predictions, Testing and Standards 1
D What is your understanding or interpretation of TS16949 7.4.1.2 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 6
C Understanding the relationship between 62304 and the MDD ER IEC 62304 - Medical Device Software Life Cycle Processes 7
S Understanding Subgroup Size - Multi Cavity (Minitab) Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 4
R Understanding clause 15.4.2.1 d) of amendment 1:2012? IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 7
L Mobile Medical App - Understanding 21 CFR Part 820 Requirements 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 3
D Understanding and implementing ISO 17025 ISO 17025 related Discussions 9
M Understanding Versions of Collateral and Particular Standards IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 7
S Understanding, Analysis and Monitoring Quality Defects on Composite Components Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 3
S Understanding PMS (Post Market Surveillance) and PMCF (Vigilance and PMCF) Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 1
B Understanding why my CpK and PpK are low, and LCL Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 20
S Understanding Quality Objectives, Metrics and KPI ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 15
Q Beginner's Understanding - The Purpose and Applications of QMS/ISO Standards Philosophy, Gurus, Innovation and Evolution 12
Q Understanding Configuration Management AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 16
W Understanding PPAP Appearance Approval APQP and PPAP 22
V Understanding Automotive Coating for Seating Mechanism Components Manufacturing and Related Processes 1
M Understanding of Regression and ANOVA in Minitab Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 8
4 Understanding ILAC policy P14:12/2010 6.3 part a) General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 28
H Understanding 8.2.3 M&M of Processes for our Internal Audit ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
P Understanding ISO 26262 Road Vehicle Functional Safety Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 2
A Understanding adoption of a product to an existing Sterilization Cycle Other US Medical Device Regulations 1

Similar threads

Top Bottom