Can someone recommend a resource that will list the hierarchy of SS "belts" and provide a concise description of the scope and skills required by each one?
I agree with the responses provided by psjlogic, but want to add three questions that any organization should be asking itself as it considers whether to maintain its ISO 9001 registration and make the transition to ISO 9001:2000:
1. Why are we registered to ISO 9001 or any other set of requirements? There are only two valid reasons I know of that are justifiable. The first is that one or more customers require it. The second is that management wants the entire organization to take the QMS seriously and wants to show its commitment to effective quality management by having a third-party come in to assess the system on a regular basis (and hopefully find areas for improvement).
2. Can we improve the system we have by making the transition and undergoing a registration "upgrade" to ISO 9001:2000? As has been indicated, your head salesman may not see much value in the system either because the present quality system provides no benefits and is nothing more than a burden to the sales reps or because he and his team don't understand what the quality system provides (that is, they're too busy selling to worry what happens in the operations). ISO 9001:2000 requires less documentation and thus leaves it up to your company to decide what documentation and paperwork is needed to meet the requirements (and where effective, undocumented procedures are enough). Thus, if your company views the transition as an opportunity to revamp the system so that it remains effective but becomes less burdensome (and perhaps more usable to the sales people and others outside the traditional production processes), then the registration process would be a verification that the changes you've made are good, continue to meet the requirements of ISO 9001 and better suit your business. Remember that the registrar you hire to audit your QMS and issue a certificate of registration is YOUR CLIENT. This doesn't mean you can "buy" a certificate without having a good QMS, but it does mean that you should expect the auditors to do real work and provide feedback to your organization that will help the company improve its processes and remain competitive.
3. If everyone else jumps off the Brooklyn Bridge, should you? (Being from New York originally, this is a common comment from a parent when a kids says, "But all the other kids are...") Again, unless your company is required to have registration because a customer says so or the organization uses registration to reinforce the effectiveness and acceptance of the QMS, registration is a waste of money. You are paying an awful lot of money to get a system in place and a certificate if you aren't using the system to manage and improve. Likewise, if others decide not to maintain registration, you need to ask why they are not maintaining it. I am not aware of a single customer that has set a deadline for suppliers to transition to ISO 9001:2000 (although the revised edition of TL 9000 is aligned with ISO 9001:2000 and the telecom industry evidently is expected to see TL 9000 registration requirements pass down from some customers to suppliers soon) nor am I aware yet of a single customer that has indicated their suppliers can drop their ISO 9001/2 registrations, etc.
Remember that your management decisions should be based on what is best for your organization to maintain and grow its business and operations, not based on what a poll that involved responses from 63 organizations (out of 40,000+ in North America) indicated.
I think the question is, what does your clientele require, and how well do you currently manage quality within a facility? Companies with good quality practices find that ISO registration may not be required - compliance to industry-specific requirements may be enough.
Working within the quality training industry as I do, I talk with all kinds of industry, and what I hear about registration for the most part is the expense of it - although in February 2000 the IRS did rule favorably that companies may claim expenses involved with ISO registration and maintenance, which is a new ruling that certainly makes the expense more palatable.
I hear resentment mostly from those business that practice good quality and have a great record for producing quality - the attitude being, "if it's not broken, why fix it".
Community metadata Could not be loaded. No pre-configured community forum parent found for the incoming fid: . You need to add this forum into custom_code/community.sql
Send to friend
Comments
qdigest 3/26/2001
I agree with the responses provided by psjlogic, but want to add three questions that any organization should be asking itself as it considers whether to maintain its ISO 9001 registration and make the transition to ISO 9001:2000:
1. Why are we registered to ISO 9001 or any other set of requirements? There are only two valid reasons I know of that are justifiable. The first is that one or more customers require it. The second is that management wants the entire organization to take the QMS seriously and wants to show its commitment to effective quality management by having a third-party come in to assess the system on a regular basis (and hopefully find areas for improvement).
2. Can we improve the system we have by making the transition and undergoing a registration "upgrade" to ISO 9001:2000? As has been indicated, your head salesman may not see much value in the system either because the present quality system provides no benefits and is nothing more than a burden to the sales reps or because he and his team don't understand what the quality system provides (that is, they're too busy selling to worry what happens in the operations). ISO 9001:2000 requires less documentation and thus leaves it up to your company to decide what documentation and paperwork is needed to meet the requirements (and where effective, undocumented procedures are enough). Thus, if your company views the transition as an opportunity to revamp the system so that it remains effective but becomes less burdensome (and perhaps more usable to the sales people and others outside the traditional production processes), then the registration process would be a verification that the changes you've made are good, continue to meet the requirements of ISO 9001 and better suit your business. Remember that the registrar you hire to audit your QMS and issue a certificate of registration is YOUR CLIENT. This doesn't mean you can "buy" a certificate without having a good QMS, but it does mean that you should expect the auditors to do real work and provide feedback to your organization that will help the company improve its processes and remain competitive.
3. If everyone else jumps off the Brooklyn Bridge, should you? (Being from New York originally, this is a common comment from a parent when a kids says, "But all the other kids are...") Again, unless your company is required to have registration because a customer says so or the organization uses registration to reinforce the effectiveness and acceptance of the QMS, registration is a waste of money. You are paying an awful lot of money to get a system in place and a certificate if you aren't using the system to manage and improve. Likewise, if others decide not to maintain registration, you need to ask why they are not maintaining it. I am not aware of a single customer that has set a deadline for suppliers to transition to ISO 9001:2000 (although the revised edition of TL 9000 is aligned with ISO 9001:2000 and the telecom industry evidently is expected to see TL 9000 registration requirements pass down from some customers to suppliers soon) nor am I aware yet of a single customer that has indicated their suppliers can drop their ISO 9001/2 registrations, etc.
Remember that your management decisions should be based on what is best for your organization to maintain and grow its business and operations, not based on what a poll that involved responses from 63 organizations (out of 40,000+ in North America) indicated.
psjlogic 3/20/2001
I think the question is, what does your clientele require, and how well do you currently manage quality within a facility? Companies with good quality practices find that ISO registration may not be required - compliance to industry-specific requirements may be enough.
Working within the quality training industry as I do, I talk with all kinds of industry, and what I hear about registration for the most part is the expense of it - although in February 2000 the IRS did rule favorably that companies may claim expenses involved with ISO registration and maintenance, which is a new ruling that certainly makes the expense more palatable.
I hear resentment mostly from those business that practice good quality and have a great record for producing quality - the attitude being, "if it's not broken, why fix it".
psjlogic 3/20/2001
The other point I was going to make is:
ISO 9000 makes Sales departments are kept accountable and ensures good communication between Sales and Manufacturing - of course they don't like it...