Why re-up ISO9001? Why continue registration?

[Sidney Vianna]

Going back to the base reason for registration - marketing tool!

Not really. The basic driver for registration is to provide CONFIDENCE to (existing and potential) customers that a supplier has a system that conforms to a standard. From the customer's perspective, as Andy already indicated, it can represent a huge benefit, simply because you don't have to send representatives to assess for yourself if the supplier has, indeed, a system in place. When you realize that many organizations have hundreds of suppliers in far away places, many time zones away, that can be a huge benefit.

From the supplier's perspective, the possibility of avoiding multiple, redundant, inconsistent customer audits is also a huge potential benefit.

 

[Wes Bucey]

Not really. The basic driver for registration is to provide CONFIDENCE to (existing and potential) customers that a supplier has a system that conforms to a standard. From the customer's perspective, as Andy already indicated, it can represent a huge benefit, simply because you don't have to send representatives to assess for yourself if the supplier has, indeed, a system in place. When you realize that many organizations have hundreds of suppliers in far away places, many time zones away, that can be a huge benefit.

From the supplier's perspective, the possibility of avoiding multiple, redundant, inconsistent customer audits is also a huge potential benefit.

What's the necessity of "confidence" in a QMS if the supplier supplies a commodity to a hundred or a million other customers and has been doing so successfully for years?

If the QMS is 100% compliant, what assurance do I have as a customer that my CUSTOM product will be delivered 100% compliant. I don't recall anything about a third party auditor assessing the relative quality or quantity of capability or capacity, merely that the QMS has a provision to document it. Practically speaking, a customer has no way of knowing from only the registration status whether a supplier will deliver error-free product or service.


Anecdotally, from my own experience, I've known at least one registered supplier who could turn out millions of error-free external threads, but getting an error-free internal thread was always a crap shoot.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

What's the necessity of "confidence" in a QMS if the supplier supplies a commodity to a hundred or a million other customers and has been doing so successfully for years?

Confidence about a supplier's capability is a HUGE issue in the Business World. Conformity assessment to international standards exists to provide confidence to stakeholders.

If the QMS is 100% compliant, what assurance do I have as a customer that my CUSTOM product will be delivered 100% compliant. I don't recall anything about a third party auditor assessing the relative quality or quantity of capability or capacity, merely that the QMS has a provision to document it. Practically speaking, a customer has no way of knowing from only the registration status whether a supplier will deliver error-free product or service.

You should familiarize yourself with the IAF Document on the Expected Outcomes for Accredited Certification to ISO 9001.

“For the defined certification scope, an organization with a certified quality management system consistently provides products that meet customer and applicable statutory and regulatory requirements, and aims to enhance customer satisfaction.”

 

[Wes Bucey]

Confidence about a supplier's capability is a HUGE issue in the Business World. Conformity assessment to international standards exists to provide confidence to stakeholders. You should familiarize yourself with the IAF Document on the Expected Outcomes for Accredited Certification to ISO 9001.

How is this different from what I wrote?[from your cited document]

"What accredited certification to ISO 9001 does not mean

1. It is important to recognize that ISO 9001 defines the requirements for an organization’s quality management system, not for its products. Accredited certification to ISO 9001 should provide confidence in the organization’s ability to “consistently provide product that meets customer and applicable statutory and regulatory requirements”. It does not necessarily ensure that the organization will always achieve 100% product conformity, though this should of course be a permanent goal.
2. ISO 9001 accredited certification does not imply that the organization is providing a superior product, or that the product itself is certified as meeting the requirements of an ISO (or any other) standard or specification."

 

[Sidney Vianna]

How is this different from what I wrote?

If you REALLY think you said the same thing, this dialogue can not converge and I shall cease from trying.

Practically speaking, a customer has no way of knowing from only the registration status whether a supplier will deliver error-free product or service

Practically speaking, you have no way of knowing when you board a plane if you will make it safe to your destination, or crash and burn along the way. Practically speaking, when you buy a car there is no way of knowing if you are getting a lemon. Practically speaking, there is NO RISK-FREE anything. We do manage risks, every day, all the time, most of time without thinking about it.

A credible supplier certification to an accepted standard is a way of mitigating risks when doing business with that supplier. Suppliers are always an asset and a liability. Supplier certification should minimize the liability aspect.

 

[Bill Pflanz]

I prefer to believe the reality is there were well-managed organizations BEFORE there were international quality management systems Standards. Where do we think the basic model for a well-managed organization came from? It sure didn't grow full-blown from a group of quality geeks sitting around saying, "Hey! Let's create the Standard everybody should follow because WE say so."

I conceded that an organization could have had a well managed organization in place before the standards. The standards are accepted by lots of well managed organizations.

Bill Pflanz

 

[quality1]

"The plain fact is an organization will be shut out of many markets without a certificate of registration from a recognized Certifying Body (registrar) which is in turn accredited by a recognized Accrediting Body."

What happens if the certificates isn't from a recognized certifying Registrar or accredited by a recognized accrediting body (ANAB)? Do customers actually look at your certification and make that determination?

Thanks

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Do customers actually look at your certification and make that determination?

Some do, some don't. Some customers scrutinize their suppliers' certificates very carefully; others are totally ignorant about accreditation, IAF, etc.

 

[Al Dyer]

All interesting. One could take the majority of the answers and say that ISO 9k is a means to show conformity, but should not be a long term solution. In other words, gaining a reputation of quality in your market place could replace the need for certification and all certified entities to 9K should be working towards this end.

Yes, Yes, Yes..........

If you (the company) make the best product, with the best people, at the best price, they will come knocking at your door no matter which so-called "registration" organization intervenes.

Always drive for the best, even in the face of artificial help.

Al...

 

[crager34]

I work for an NQA-1 supplier and in one of our methods for a Commercial Grade Survey of a Supplier they have to have a documented quality program that implements the controls and actions necessary to verify the critical characteristics of the items we procure. It goes along with with us that they have a ISO 9001 Certified program.