Featured Product
This Week in Quality Digest Live
Standards Features
Matthew Barsalou
How failure modes and effects analysis became commonplace
Meg Sinclair
100% real, 100% anonymized, 100% scary
Michael Mills
The answer might surprise you
Alonso Diaz
Consulting the FDA’s Case for Quality program
Master Gage and Tool Co.
Why it matters for accurate measurements

More Features

Standards News
HaloDrive Omnidirectional Drive System for heavy-duty operations
Draft publication aims to help measure and evaluate security programs
Progress via sustainability standards
Has played pivotal role in servicing and supporting the conformity assessment industry
Handle document, audit, and concerns management more effectively
Businesses with $300 million or more revenue in Europe must comply
Helps managers integrate statistical insights into daily operations
Providing practical interpretation of the EU AI Act

More News

American National Standards Institute ANSI


Standards Wars Workshop Spotlights Perspectives on Competition, Coordination

U.S. voluntary consensus standardization system is strong, effective, and responsive

Published: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 - 13:07

(ANSI: New York) -- Nearly 200 representatives of industry, standards and conformance organizations, government, and consumer groups gathered in Washington, D.C.—and 70 more tuned in via teleconference—for the May 12, 2011, American National Standards Institute (ANSI) workshop, Standards Wars: Myth or Reality? And despite the battle-ready title, a general view emerged that while conflict and duplication in standards development are deserving of continual vigilance, the U.S. voluntary consensus standardization system is strong, effective, and responsive to the country’s needs. According to presenters and attendees, a one-size-fits-all approach is not the optimal model when it comes to standards development.

“For years, the issues of competition, convergence, and coordination have been hotly debated within the standards and conformance community,” says ANSI senior vice president and COO Fran Schrotter in her opening remarks. “In an effort to share information about how market forces impact different areas of standards development, ANSI convened this workshop to provide an open and constructive mechanism through which different viewpoints are discussed.”

Made possible with the support of a grant from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the workshop was organized as a highly interactive series of panel-based discussions and question and answer sessions.

“I am sure that each of you brings to this session some thoughts and experiences related to conflict, duplication, coordination, and competition in the standards world,” said workshop facilitator Jim Pauley, senior vice president of external affairs and government relations at Schneider Electric. “And similar to our experiences at any good consensus standards development process, we will not all agree. But we can all learn from each other in our common goal of strengthening the robust U.S. voluntary consensus standards system that exists today.”

Pauley also moderated the first panel that presented standards users’ viewpoints on the topics of whether multiple standards are a problem and how standards gain acceptance and prominence.

Representing the Consumers Union, Don Mays explained that his organization monitors the effectiveness of existing standards and works to improve them on behalf of consumers. Amy Marasco of Microsoft stressed that the information and communications technology landscape has thrived under a system where multiple standards are often available, competing for acceptance by firms and their customers. Key technology areas such as database access models, document formats, digital image formats, and audio and video formats all benefit from the availability of multiple standards to meet different needs.

Mary Saunders of NIST explained that the federal government recognizes that multiple standards solutions exist as a reflection of the entrepreneurial nature of the economy. As a tool for deploying a particular technology or assisting a national priority, an agency looks for the best standard; the source is not the issue. She asserted that ANSI serves an important role in fostering collaboration and has done a lot to facilitate discussions on this issue, but cannot be put in the position of jury to decide what is duplicative or conflicting or to force standards developers to act one way or another.

The second panel was led by Neil Bogatz of the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials (IAPMO) and offered the perspective of standards developing organizations, including ANSI-accredited standards developers and consortia. Issues discussed included the drivers for developing a standard, coordination, and duplication.

Kathie Morgan of ASTM International stressed that coherency is the collective responsibility of the global standards community. She also supported the development of a global standards database with current and comprehensive information on approved standards as well as work in progress provided by all developers to assist coordination efforts. Claire Ramspeck of the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) pointed out that the search engine for standards, the NSSN, which is administered by ANSI, is being further developed and enhanced, and its improvements should be well publicized to foster greater usage. ANSI is currently at work on this upgrade, as was discussed by Bob Hager in a presentation later in the workshop.

Andy Updegrove of Gesmer Updegrove provided insight into the world of consortia, emphasizing that almost every week there is a new body developing information and communications technologies (ICT) standards. He further explained that developers have an obligation to the market to create useful standards, and those will be the ones widely adopted. Karen Higginbottom from ISO/IEC Joint Technical Committee 1 shed some more light into the ICT perspective, stressing the importance of reaching out to and collaborating with the many different standardization efforts competing in the marketplace.

The final panel presented the perspectives of specifiers of standards, including those involved in regulation and procurement. NIST’s Gordon Gillerman moderated the discussion on how standards are chosen for government programs, participation in development, and duplication as related to standards enforced by law or regulation. Gillerman indicated that the same attributes that make the consensus standards process successful—such as openness, consideration of alternative perspectives, and a commitment to continual improvement—will serve the U.S. standards system well as we address this complex issue.

In describing her work with the U.S. Department of Energy’s Superior Energy Performance (SEP) program, Aimee McKane of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory stressed that her program relies upon both national and international standards as well as ANSI accreditation to assess conformance to those standards. Bill Dupler provided insight into the code-creation process of Chesterfield County, Virginia, explaining that in choosing standards you can have it both ways: Sometimes you only need one; sometimes multiple standards are a benefit.

Mary McKiel, Ph.D., of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said that as specifiers of standards, federal regulatory agencies use a variety of approaches, both in the use of nongovernment standards and in requesting their development. Regulators specify what they need according to the mandates they have to fulfill, and they use nongovernment standards that best serve the intent of regulations or nonregulatory capacity-building programs. Likewise, in procurement programs, while there are laws governing federal acquisition, departments and agencies can and do use a wide variety of standards to meet program needs. She emphasized that one size certainly does not fit all. McKiel and Gillerman agreed that a systems engineering approach can be most useful. McKiel also highlighted the value of a multiple path approach.

A library of workshop documents is available here. To view a slide show of photos, click here.

ANSI is developing a workshop report to summarize the event’s discussions. Once completed, the report will be freely available at www.ansi.org/standardswars.


About The Author

American National Standards Institute ANSI’s picture

American National Standards Institute ANSI

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) coordinates the U.S. voluntary standardization and conformity assessment system, serving the diverse interests of more than 270,000 companies and organizations and 30 million professionals worldwide. ANSI is the official U.S. representative to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and, via the U.S. National Committee, the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC).