Was transitioning to ISO 9001:2000 worth it?

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Originally posted by Davey in the thread Is the stampede about to start?
While the discussion has generally been who has and who has not upgraded, I think the next question is who has seen any benefit from the upgrade?

My company upgraded recently with no discernible benefit whatsoever.

Good point. Was it worth it? Speaking for myself: Yes.
We used the opportunity to upgrade the system from an old tired one to something more useful. That is at least what the users say.

How about you? What do you think?

/Claes

 

[Teknow]

Very similar to your experience Claes, we have managed to re-cycle a whole lot of paper & produced a much more user friendly system , one that focusses on business benefits and not just to satisy the old 20 clauses!

 

[Cari Spears]

I have always felt that my job would be a lot easier if the word "Quality" were replaced with the word "Business" in the standard. The 2000 revision brings more focus to top management in their responsibilities to visibly lead the QMS and communicate organizational goals and progress towards those goals at every level of the organization. Though we have not registered yet (target date July 23, 2003), I am already seeing the benefits of the upgrade. Being required to track performance measurables in productivity, efficiency, effectiveness, etc., and furthermore, being required to react to negative trends, inherently ties the Quality System to the Business System.

 

[Mike S.]

Claes,

Good idea for a poll! I do have a question, though: Do you mean "was it worth it" to upgrade to 9001:2000 whether or not you were certified by a registrar, or was your question intent on determining if it was "worth it" to get certified/resistered to 9001:2000? Since there may be a huge difference in cost and maybe hassle between the two, I thought it might make a difference in the responses.

 

[Aaron Lupo]

We have not officially made the upgrade yet our audit is in September, however, I don't see any problems should be a pretty smooth transition. Is it worth it, from where I am sitting yes! Why you ask? If we didn't have ISO Certification our clients would pull out, I don't know how many times a client has said we went with you becuase the other companies we were considering were not ISO certified. We are a Medical Company, so we have to do these things for the FDA, yet they still want us to have ISO/EN certification. They know they FDA does not inspect on a regualr basis, while they were here twice last year before that it was 5 years since they last inspected the our system, now what kind of confidence can you put in that?

 

[Brad Serangeli]

We have just completed a managment review with our top management with regards to the new standard. The one point that I kept "banging" into their heads was that fact that we now will see if we are meeting the customers requirements. The new standard has brought new focus to our company as far as meeting the expectations of our customers. Before it was if they reorder they must be happy, now we track comments, complaints, and suggestions. I thought it was somewhat comic that it took an outside standard to help us serve our customers better. As far as transition it has been for the most part pretty smooth. We have our first audit by our registar in July so it should be educational.

 

[RoxaneB]

Originally posted by Cari Spears
I have always felt that my job would be a lot easier if the word "Quality" were replaced with the word "Business" in the standard.

Totally agree! But since the Standard won't do it (for reasons I understand), that doesn't keep me from doing it within my own system! Our QMS, as part of the transition to ISO 9001:2000, has been renamed the BMS. At first it was just BS, but that caused too many giggles when it came time for for the BS Review.

It is on my timeline for 2003 to start a new project (after we transition) called "5S the BMS". I've told my boss I want a tshirt with that emblazoned on the front! 5S is the newest initiative for our entire organziation in North America with the belief that it will help us become a world class organization. I like to think that 5S can go beyond me ensuring my stapler is back in the same spot all of the time and that I have only 10% (or less) personal stuff on my desk. I think it can be applied to our BMS - to help reduce redundancy, to lessen the paperwork, to streamline the processes.

Already we have started and people are seeing the BMS as being much more user-friendly and approachable. Evolving auditors have gone from asking standard questions to having more like "tea time" conversations.

So was it worth it? Yes. And we haven't even officially done the transition yet.

Countdown clock reads at T-minus 27 days and counting!

 

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Originally posted by Cari Spears
I have always felt that my job would be a lot easier if the word "Quality" were replaced with the word "Business" in the standard. ---X---

Yeah, I agree. We call it a Business Management System just like in RCBeyette's example. In our case the BMS covers the combined Quality, Environmental & Safety systems.

Originally posted by Mike S.
Claes,

Good idea for a poll! I do have a question, though: Do you mean "was it worth it" to upgrade to 9001:2000 whether or not you were certified by a registrar, or was your question intent on determining if it was "worth it" to get certified/resistered to 9001:2000? Since there may be a huge difference in cost and maybe hassle between the two, I thought it might make a difference in the responses.

Errrr.... To be perfectly honest I thought about a certified system, but that does not necessarily have to be the case, of course. Let's say a compliant system, whether it is certified or not, shall we?

Originally posted by RCBeyette ---X---At first it was just BS, but that caused too many giggles when it came time for for the BS Review.

It is on my timeline for 2003 to start a new project (after we transition) called "5S the BMS". ---X--- I think it can be applied to our BMS - to help reduce redundancy, to lessen the paperwork, to streamline the processes.
---X---
So was it worth it? Yes. And we haven't even officially done the transition yet.

Wow... Great post RCBeyette! I particularly like the way you just keep going while the momentum is there. Too many of us will be happy with what we have once the ISO9001:2000 badge is on the wall, and that is plain murder on any QMS... (Stagnation). I for one would dearly love to hear how your plans work out, because I'm out there on the improvement war path myself... How about short progress report every now and then?

As for the BS system:

/Claes

 

[Randy Stewart]

We were informed on Monday that our customer and parent company does not want us to be 9K2K or 16949! Since one of our departments (about 4% of our work) is TE we were told to wait on the re-write. As of March we were 9K2K "compliant".

"5S the BMS".

We renamed ours the BES or Business Enterprise System and have started the same exercise. Great minds really do think alike!

We have operated and audited with the "process approach" for some time now. Our VP of Manufacturing is sold on the Toyota philosophy of Lean Manufacturing. The real benefits of the new standards were already in place.

 

[RoxaneB]

Originally posted by Claes Gefvenberg
I for one would dearly love to hear how your plans work out, because I'm out there on the improvement war path myself... How about short progress report every now and then?

/Claes [/B]

Plans?!?! I'm supposed to have a plan?!?! Darn, why aren't I informed of these things ahead of time?!?!

Actually, first step is look at all 769 documents in our system and figure out which ones really need to be there. Already started at the beginning of the year (unofficially) and have rendered around 80 documents obsolete. But some really interesting ones remain.

I've told our QC Department I will work hand-in-hand with them as they own 20% of our company's documentation. They actually have a controlled document showing fraction-to-decimal conversions! Now, Claes, I don't know how it works in Sweden, but over here in North America the fact that 1/4" = 0.25" hasn't changed in at least the last five or ten years!

With our EMS piggy-backing off of the QMS portion of the BMS (ahhh...acronyms...gotta love 'em), I'd like to integrate them even closer together. Especially with 14K and 9K complimenting each other as they do. Using our Chilean sister facility as an example, I will hopefully have a good role model to help me merge the systems; like you, they have combined 9K, 14K, OHSAS 18K into one management system.

I also have plans to work with one of our dept's who owns 1/6 of the company. The plan is work on their heavily text-based documentation into flow charts for their six key processes. From there, supporting documentation will be developed for operational controls and non-routine situations. While their forms will most likely remainin the system, it is estimated they they will go from around 75 work instructions to 30.

Needless to say, stagnation won't be allowed to happen here! It would be too easy to just get the certificate and do no more than is necessary to maintain the certificate. But it's not just about that piece paper. We want all of our Stakeholders to be happy...Customers, Employees, Community, Vendors, and Shareholders. We have prided ourselves in the past for going above and beyond the stated "shall's" of the Standard. And to become complacent in how we do business, to accept our Management System the way it is now, is to fall behind...with Stakeholder Satisfaction and in the industry as a whole.