What is the status of the next version of ISO 14001?

[Stijloor]

The tragic and unnecessary expansion of standards, formats, structures, and standards writing bodies will ultimately lead to the demise of industry acceptance of standards in general.

 

[insect warfare]

Well Brian,

Not everyone shares your enthusiasm for the HLS. In fact over 14 multi-nationals in the automotive industry share an entirely different view. There are others who view the HLS as undermining a systems concept. Some even have gone so far as to believe that this will devolve ISO MSS.

However, I am always interested in learning from differing positions. Can you show me how the HLS "will further support the PDCA methodology"? A diagram? An explanation?
Thanks

While it is not immediately evident in the ISO/IEC Directives Part 1 document, the clause structure itself should reveal the biggest indicator of a closer alignment with PDCA (see below):

Plan
Clause 4 - Context of the organization
Clause 5 - Leadership
Clause 6 - Planning

Do
Clause 7 - Support
Clause 8 - Operation

Check
Clause 9 - Performance evaluation

Act
Clause 10 - Improvement

What is this "systems concept" that you feel that the new structure would be undermining, and in what specific ways would it be affected? Please explain....I have not worked in the automotive industry and would like to know your thoughts.

Brian

 

[LEJoh]

Dear Brian,

From a clause heading standpoint it does look like a simple process. However, the devil is in the detail and the way requirements are being moved around and added under sub-clauses, there will be fragmentation of the PDCA.

While I never had a one on one discussion with Deming, I understand that he felt ISO 14001 was twisted a little away from PDCA to begin with.

In terms of systems concept I am a fan of the integration of system thinkers such as Deming, Ackoff, Bateson and Meadows. A simple explanation of systems is from Ackoff.

"1. A system is a whole that is defined by its function(s) in one or more containing systems.
2. Every system contains at least two essential parts and these must satisfy three conditions.
3a. Every essential part of a system can affect its behavior or properties.
3b. The way an essential part affects the properties or behavior of the whole depends on the state or activity of at least one other part of the system.
3c. Groups of essential parts, subsystems, also can affect the behavior and properties of the whole system and none has an independent effect on it.

Some important properties of a system derive from its definition.

When a system is taken apart it loses its essential properties.

No part of a system can carry out the function that defines the system.

When a system is taken apart its essential parts lose their ability to carry out the function they have in the whole.

When the performance of any essential part of a system, taken separately, is improved, the performance of the whole may not be."

Ciao

 

[insect warfare]

I don't believe that there is any direct evidence that the "devil in the details" would necessarily lead to a fragmentation of PDCA....for PDCA is not only a scientific problem-solving approach, it also promotes a culture for critical thinkers.

What you are referring to as "systems thinking" could be considered a separate philosophy, and could act as a vehicle for "breakthroughs" that are realized through the use of PDCA. There is nothing stopping organizations from using PDCA and systems thinking concurrently. In the end it all comes down to 4 things: effectiveness, performance, sustainability and improvement - how they are attained may not be of great consequence to some.

Brian

 

[Sidney Vianna]

From the websphere....

The revision of ISO 14001, which gives requirements for environmental management systems, is progressing well. We now have a second Committee Draft which has been circulated for ballot until 23 January 2014.
The draft is also available to buy for 38 Swiss francs from the ISO website, in order to give interested customers an idea of the changes coming up.
We plan to publish the revision of this standard early 2015.

 

[Helmut Jilling]

Sidney, has there been any discussion within the TAG committees about whether it is wise to release upgrades to all three standards (ISO 9001, 14001 and TS) at the same time? I question whether there is enough CB auditor capacity to handle that many major upgrade audits in the same period. Many of us will be doing training for part of our available audit days, I am not sure that there is enough capacity.

 

[Helmut Jilling]

TS 16949 will NOT FOLLOW the HLS (high level structure).

My understanding is that the industry has chosen not to comment as an industry on 9001 or 14001, that is for the individual company to decide. Also, it is important to remember that ISO MSS are voluntary standards, an organization may choose to stay with 14001:2004 if it decides this is in its best interest.

I am providing here my own explanation of the message I have seen from the TMB. Annex SL is a "should-all', TMB would like all MSS to follow it, but understands the need for exceptions. Any deviation must include a rationale. It is not clear at the end of the day what TMB will do with these deviations. And, with your data on 13485, that makes TWO standards that will not follow the HLS. I expect there will be more.

In addition, there is some flexibility in how the HLS is applied - some versions I have seen will not make them user friendly documents, another ding in ISO's market. As it stands ISO has less than a 1% adoption globally against the stats for any MSS adoption when compared to the number of legally constituted employer-based entities in the world.

I don't think anyone would argue the logic and potential savings of a 'plug and play' approach where it enabled users of multiple standards, a simple framework on which to build an integrated system, whether it was for EMS, QMS, ENMS, or whatever. However, the extent to which those involved with drafting the HLS, in my personal view, went too far. In the 20 years of my involvement in writing and negotiating MS standards, and helping write guides for users and helping the development of EMS in entities, I have yet to have someone state that they could not integrate other ISO MS standards.

I had not heard about 13485, thanks for that data. Will investigate.

As recently as July 2013, the President of IAOB gave a training talk that included his comment that he expects TS-16949 will use the new ISO 9001 as a framework, just as in the past. Can't say his word would be the final word, but I would think he is pretty close to the mother ship. I would not write it off until there is a formal pronouncement to the contrary.

 

[LEJoh]

More insight on the next version of ISO 14001

Many organizations have integrated their management practices based on the PDCA model. In fact ISO recognizes in its 2012 Consolidated Supplement the value of PDCA in its definition of a management system standard, in Note 1.

SL.5.2​

MSS - Management System Standard​

Standard that provides requirements or guidelines for organizations to develop and systematically manage their policies, processes and procedures in order to achieve specific objectives.​

NOTE 1 An effective management system is usually based on managing t​

he organization?s processes using a​

?Plan-Do-Check-Act? approach in order to achieve the intended outcomes

So why then did the group who developed what is called the High Level Structure, which is supposedly what all MSS in the future will use, ignore the PDCA by intention?

Will this lead to competition? Will users just ignore the new standard? Will they abandon certification? Will users figure out what new requirements add value to their organization and enhance environmental performance, and embrace these into their existing EMS? How's your crystal ball?

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Re: More insight on the next version of ISO 14001

So why then did the group who developed what is called the High Level Structure, which is supposedly what all MSS in the future will use, ignore the PDCA by intention?

What make you say that? Where in the HLS, conflicts with PDCA?

When I look at the ISO MSS HLS, I see clear alignment with the PDCA cycle.

 

[LEJoh]

Re: More insight on the next version of ISO 14001

The devil is in the details. I would be interested in seeing how you have integrated them.