Mike,
Nice article. I think you could change the title to read that Management has no idea about ISO and your article would still be relevant.

In the past, ISO registrars sold the concept of ISO as a marketing tool to get more customers and quality was barely even mentioned....unfortunately, I don't think the mindset has changed much over the years. In my opinion, having ISO certification doesn't mean much because I've seen so many companies put more effort into creating the illusion of a quality system than actually living it. Plus it really is a conflict of interest to have the same company that you pay your registration fees to, audit you....the registrar isn't going to 'bite the hand that feeds them'.

Sandra Gauvin
http://CurrentQuality

Uh oh.

Is 9 out of 10 bad? The major problem is convincing upper management that they are not ALWAYS RIGHT, and the little people aren't ALWAYS WRONG. This is abetted by the fact that here in Michigan, we've been in the Great Depression Mk II for decades, and so everyone is afraid to stir the pot at the risk of their jobs.

My former boss, a Plant Manager, said in a meeting he would commit to 3S, not 5S. He thought 60% was good enough. The company's margins were so fat they scrapped all the defective product without blinking.

"We just want the paper on the wall" I heard that a lot but I expected it. After all that's what most companies I engaged with wanted. And YEP, most thought quality was the quality managers job and were nearly clueless about what a process or Lean truly was.

When I accepted a position at a testing lab needing ISO 17025 accreditation I knew it was only to satisfy a TS 16949 requirement but I went in with eyes wide open and maintained a decades long personal commitment to making a positive difference. Yes Mike, the Ten Signs applied to top management and I can't see that has changed much or that they really want to learn about ISO, Quality, Process, Lean or really much of anything other than how to keep that piece of paper on the wall. But we were fortunate. The hands-on managers on site truly wanted to be better and top management's indifference to details was all we needed to start creating value without their interference. I now consider us fortunate that top management isn't involved. We now understand and use measurement uncertainty to know how good our data is, we calibrate regularly for particular applications, we validate our test methods and conduct experiments to learn more about them, we set goals and achieve them, we control our processes better, we audit ourselves with the intention of getting better, we use Lean with considerable benefits to our customers and ourselves, and we see ourselves as being on a journey now instead of believing we are world class. We owe it all to top management and the Paper on the Wall. I'm grateful!

Love your articles if not everything you say. Keep it up!

You're right Mike, and it happens here down-under too.

But Dr Jack Welch at GE was different wasn't he? So much so Six Sigma wouldn't be as big as it is without his unwitting (?) contribution and the Six Sigma brigade wouldn't be coining megabucks from Deming reworked!

In his autobiography, "Jack", Welch said "what you measure is what you get". I call it "WYMIWYG" (from WYSIWYG word processors?) , but add "YOGWYM" (for You Only Get What You Measure) so if CEOs aren't being measured on quality performance it's no surprise they don't give a bent nickle one way or the other; and likewise the execs or VPs who report to them. Only truly professional senior managers understand that there's more to it than platitudes and smart-talk and that maintaining an effective quality system is all they're there for. In my view, the rest should have the decency to hand back their salaries and take up more gainful employment selling cars.

I wonder if any of the registrars (certification bodies) or accreditation bodies out there will contribute to this blog, because I for one, would like to know why they have allowed the stuff you describe to go on for so long without pulling certificates. The unfortunate truth is that companies headed by your 10 stripe CEOs and their off-siders don't even comply with 4.1 and 5.1 in ISO 9001, let alone any the detail that follows.

Cheers

Worked one place (software development) where the most senior manager edicted that all non-conformances found during an audit week would be corrected or have an action plan acceptable to the audit team before they left. Poor folks who got audited the day before that last day!

Program also succeeded because several middle and upper managers left or were moved to other positions if they weren't "with the program."

Lots of public chest-pounding about the results and little discussion of how it was actually accomplished. (One article under the senior manager's name did hint at management changes made if you read carefully.)