It Ain’t Over Till the Fat Lady Sings

What we know about ISO 9001:2015, and what we should do now

Wed, 10/02/2013 - 11:00

As ISO 9001 wends its way through the revision process, there have been dozens of articles, webinars, forums, and discussions anticipating what the final product will look like. Pundits and experts, consultants and gurus are all weighing in on what’s going to happen. The prognosticators have made a run on crystal balls, decimating the fortunetelling industry. With all the predictions all we need is for the Vegas bookies to starting laying odds on what will or won’t be included in the next version of 9001.

ADVERTISEMENT

There is a lot of stuff out in the public domain. Some of the information that has been published is very useful. It helps us all to plan. However, lots of what’s being hawked as definitive is, at best, premature.

What follows covers two things: What we currently know, and what actions are appropriate at this time.

What we know for sure

ISO 9001 is being revised. The systematic review was conducted; surveys were done and the final balloted decision was that it was appropriate and timely to revise this popular and broadly applied standard. The vote and ensuing work is intended to ensure the standard's continued relevance and usefulness in the marketplace

 …

Want to continue?
Log in or create a FREE account.
By logging in you agree to receive communication from Quality Digest. Privacy Policy.

Comments

Thank you for your sensible words, Mrs. Robitaille: too much has been written and said on ISO 9001:2015, too much fuss made. Even before its publishing, it's the event of the decade in our business, and it looks like it will sell even more than its ISO 9001:2000 predecessor; even more so, if we consider what is more or less officially rumored in the last year or so. The only solid brick we have is the rather recent CD, and even that is not much to build a wall: I have publicly commented it and I came to my own conclusions, that cannot be but preliminary. The only thing I have at heart is to prevent what happened in my delightful Country when ISO 9001:2000 came into force: just the day after, newspapers were full of articles informing that the car servicing network of a notorious german car maker got the registration certificate on that very day.

Submitted by mikehark on Tue, 10/08/2013 - 07:49

Denise,

Thanks for your comments on this subject.  Based on my review of the draft standard, some areas seem to be glossed over in the standard, some improved, and some worsened.  The one thing I was hoping they would do in the new standard is say something about the need for corrective action (one of your areas of expertise) and provide at least an acknowledgement that application of corrective action was not needed for all nonconformities (failure to meet requirements).  Instead, the writers of the standard did nothing to improve this area and in my opinion, made is worse in the rewording.  The application of corrective action appropriate to the effects is rather meaningless and still implies that CA is needed for all nonconformities.  Of course, we always argue the case as to when CA is needed, and can usually win that with an ISO auditor, but I thought the standard writers would at least consider clearing this up.  Instead, the standard is not very helpful in this area and seems to validate that the mindset is the very one Deming warned us about:  everything is treated as if it's a special cause.  The amount of resource wasted in this is enormous.  Have we learned nothing?

- Mike Harkins

Add new comment