Why re-up ISO9001? Why continue registration?

[AndyN]

I have been having the same thoughts. My company is currently registered to ISO9001 and AS9100 and I have seen no real benefit yet.

May I ask (like I did in a post before) what benefit you were expecting? There are something in life which don't do much for you, unless you put some work into it. Certification is a bit like that. Much of the less obvious benefits go to your customers, but for you to see some internal benefit, you have to 'work it', so to speak...

What have you done to 'work it'...?

 

[dv8shane]

Marketing the value of a registration to ISO 9001 presupposes an organization has capability and capacity to add business. At that point, it is a matter for the bosses to assign someone to identify targets who require (or would be impressed by) ISO registration and pitch those targets on doing business.

ISO registration may be a big neon sign, but someone has to mount the sign where it can be seen and then flip the switch to light it up.

Personally, I think showing folks how to market the fact of their registration would be a useful "value added" benefit for registrars to offer.

Wes,

I am pleased you picked up on the inference to a previous post you made in my last sentence.

Here is the neon sign check out my website http://www.avamet.ca/ it has had 14k plus hits and the first thing you see is the ISO/AS certificate. On top of that the company is more than capable and has the capacity to add new business. Yet the company gains more business through word of mouth than any other means. The website and OASIS have generated very little new business. My company is chosen for what it does and the way it does it, not if if it is ISO.

 

[dv8shane]

May I ask (like I did in a post before) what benefit you were expecting? There are something in life which don't do much for you, unless you put some work into it. Certification is a bit like that. Much of the less obvious benefits go to your customers, but for you to see some internal benefit, you have to 'work it', so to speak...

What have you done to 'work it'...?

I would have thought it would have generated more business by allowing the company to compete in this market. As it turns out almost every customer who is ISO/AS registered can use who ever they choose as long as they meet their requirements. My company is not accredited to ISO17025 but yet I am an approved supplier for ISO17025 companies that have taken the time to review my work/QA system.

So in reality I ended up doing this to satisfy my own needs to know, and I do not regret it. In fact I am planning to go ISO17025 accredited before my AS9100 and ISO9001 registrations expire.

Shane

 

[Wes Bucey]

Wes,

I am pleased you picked up on the inference to a previous post you made in my last sentence.

Here is the neon sign check out my website http://www.avamet.ca/ it has had 14k plus hits and the first thing you see is the ISO/AS certificate. On top of that the company is more than capable and has the capacity to add new business. Yet the company gains more business through word of mouth than any other means. The website and OASIS have generated very little new business. My company is chosen for what it does and the way it does it, not if if it is ISO.

Just for giggles, compare running a big public ad for yourself when you want a job and rifle shooting at individual targets where your work will be appreciated. If your business comes via word of mouth, why not have your marketing team ASK for more referrals from happy customers? Networking is a tried and true method of marketing and often far more effective,
.

My reference to neon signs was strictly a metaphor which I meant as "the ISO banner needs to be waved, but that waving needs to be direct, repetitive, and persistent, ALWAYS alluding to QMS[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif] features which provide value to customers."

In my contract machining business, we got a lot of mileage out of referrals who touted our "direct to production line" prowess as a value-added feature which eliminated incoming inspection and added JIT delivery which allowed a customer to reduce internal handling from loading dock to inspection to inventory to production. The customers were "trained" to understand their soft cost savings justified paying us premium dollars compared to would-be competitors who ran up costs for delayed shipments, quality returns, etc.
[/FONT]

We "enhanced" the image by packaging product in quantities to match one shift of production, designing the packaging to allow an operator to work efficiently direct from the package. It was always an ego boost to visit a customer's production line and see our distinctive blue and white packaging throughout the area, compared with everyone else's plain brown cardboard. (special logo packaging that only cost 15 cents more per carton, designed specifically for the part it contained, which could be holding as much as much as $2,000 worth of product.) All our packaging was pre-tested and certified (dropping, stacking, vibrating, etc.) by the experts at UPS and we NEVER had a part damaged in transit, a fact you can be sure we also used in marketing.

BOTTOM LINE:
"neon" is just code meaning
"now that you've got the ISO badge, learn how to market it to best effect!"

 

[kgott]

While informed and knowledge people will question this, and perhaps rightly so, but by having the certificate your organisation can use the certificate as evidence that they have “at least a minimum provable level of efficiency and effectiveness in their key business processes.”

Your organisation can market this to their existing and potential customers.

 

[robfenn]

Here in the UK, the big motivation for ISO 9001 is gaining new business. In fact, it far outweighs the desire to improve business process and efficiency.

I would also be fascinated what customers deem as 'value'. I'd like think we (as a CB) do as much as we can, and we get a lot of positive feedback, but there is of course a line. Auditors are not consultants, and if following the appropriate guidelines, should never go into that territory. They are simply there to tell you whether you conform to the standard; but i appreciate there is a good and a bad way of doing that.

 

[kgott]

I think many of the issues canvassed in this thread and on this forum generally suffer from a common problem that afflicts our work.

One of the things I have learned from this forum is that our line of work is mostly about applying the requirements of ISO 9001 (or its equivalent in your country) to the product realisation process primarily, and the other supporting management systems secondary. I have also learned that it’s best to forget about the word quality and to think in terms of a ‘Management System.’

Suppose; the work we do was called Productivity Efficiency Assurance or something like; Management System Efficiency Assurance, or perhaps even Management System Assurance; would that make any difference to what ‘certification’ would mean to us and our customers? Would that change the way we think about the work we do? Would that change the way we think about quality?

Where is the ‘quality’ in ISO 9001? What’s ISO 9001 got to do with quality?

Supposing the name of ISO 9001 was changed to “ISO 9001: 2008 Business Management Systems Requirements” would that help or hinder the work we do?

 

[somashekar]

I think many of the issues canvassed in this thread and on this forum generally suffer from a common problem that afflicts our work.

One of the things I have learned from this forum is that our line of work is mostly about applying the requirements of ISO 9001 (or its equivalent in your country) to the product realisation process primarily, and the other supporting management systems secondary. I have also learned that it’s best to forget about the word quality and to think in terms of a ‘Management System.’

Suppose; the work we do was called Productivity Efficiency Assurance or something like; Management System Efficiency Assurance, or perhaps even Management System Assurance; would that make any difference to what ‘certification’ would mean to us and our customers? Would that change the way we think about the work we do? Would that change the way we think about quality?

Where is the ‘quality’ in ISO 9001? What’s ISO 9001 got to do with quality?

Supposing the name of ISO 9001 was changed to “ISO 9001: 2008 Business Management Systems Requirements” would that help or hinder the work we do?

It is a pity that many many people and many in the top management are firm believers that quality is JUST a department in the organization and QMS is the quality department business.

 

[AndyN]

Here in the UK, the big motivation for ISO 9001 is gaining new business. In fact, it far outweighs the desire to improve business process and efficiency.

But we mustn't confuse the implementation of ISO 9001 in an organization with the need/desire for Certification of that system. The two are quite different.

Certification is done to gain new business, the implementation of the system (whether certified or not) is up to management to grasp and wring the improvement from...

 

[gbcqc]

I think many of the issues canvassed in this thread and on this forum generally suffer from a common problem that afflicts our work.

One of the things I have learned from this forum is that our line of work is mostly about applying the requirements of ISO 9001 (or its equivalent in your country) to the product realisation process primarily, and the other supporting management systems secondary. I have also learned that it’s best to forget about the word quality and to think in terms of a ‘Management System.’

Suppose; the work we do was called Productivity Efficiency Assurance or something like; Management System Efficiency Assurance, or perhaps even Management System Assurance; would that make any difference to what ‘certification’ would mean to us and our customers? Would that change the way we think about the work we do? Would that change the way we think about quality?

Where is the ‘quality’ in ISO 9001? What’s ISO 9001 got to do with quality?

Supposing the name of ISO 9001 was changed to “ISO 9001: 2008 Business Management Systems Requirements” would that help or hinder the work we do?

I agree also. I worked many years in Supplier Quality and Supplier Development and found that when a supplier had a Management System Manual (or a business system manual) instead of a Quality Manual, almost everycase the system and their product was second to none against our total supply base.

I have been into suppliers that the management would tell you, Quality Manual? Quality handles that. It usally showed in their product. Manufacturing was to make parts and quality was to measure that quality stuff into the product.