Re: ISO 9000 credibility (Long)

[R2 Innovations <R2innovations -at- MYNA -dot- COM>]

Someone wrote:

> ISO9000 just force you to define a desired quality level and formalize your
> manufacturing process accordingly.

At the risk of repeating myself, ISO 9000 DOES NOT force you to do
anything!!  The ISO 9000 series of standards is all about giving the
custopmer exactly what they order.  For companies producing goods for
retail sale, this can be a difficult task as no one submits their
specifications and waits for the product to be built.  In these
cases, companies must establish a level of quality that they are
willing to see their name attached to, and produce products
accordingly.

We must all be careful not to get caught up in the hype generated
by the Marketing department -- you know, "state of the art,"
"world class,",  etc., etc. sheesh -- used to generate sales.  The bottom
 line of all transactions is, _buyer beware_.

> If you decide to produce crap, it is all right, as long as you have written
> procedures that describe the correct manufacturing/checking process and you
> follow them. ISO9000 philosophy is: it is up to you to decide what you want
> to make and which level of customer satisfaction you want to get. ISO9000
> does not care about it.

I wholeheartedly agree with the writer here.  The only saving grace is
that the company won't be around very long, unless that is, there is
a market for crap.

> From the customer's point of view, this means that he/she does not get any
> assurance about the fact that the product/service will be able to satisfy
> his/her needs. The manufacturer might have decided to produce ISO9000
> certified crap and the customer would get it for their uncertified-but-hard-
> to-gain money

See my comment above re the buyer having the final decision on
purchasing.  The one thing ISO does ensure is that the company will
be able to produce the same level of quality with great repeatability.
If that level is high quality -- suitable for use as determined by the
marketplace -- then the consumer can be assured the
company produces this same level of quality consistently.

Iain Harrison wrote:

> I think you are missing the point. ISO9000 never has been a system of quality:
> it is a system of measuring quality. However good or bad your product is, unless
> you have a clearly defined way to assess the quality of your produce, all you
> can do is guess at the quality.

You're real close Iain, but not quite on target.  Let's look at the
actual title of the standards.  It is  "ISO 9001:  Quality Systems -
Model for Quality Assurance in Design/Development, Production,
Installation, and Servicing. "  The other two standards, ISO 9002 and
9003, all have the same basic wording.  ISO 9000 is really about
_managing_ the quality system, an integral part of which is the
measurment of quality.

> Elsewhere, on another topic, someone talked of the need to choose two out of
> 'good' 'quick' and 'cheap'. The same is true of quality. Sometimes poor quality
> is all that is needed. I really don't want paper tissues in solid gold
> presentation cases. I don't mind the odd knot in kindling wood. I'm more
> concerned with firness for purpose.

The biggest problem we have in the quality arena is defining what
quality _really, really_ is.  Ask any 20 people, and you will get 20
different responses.  For some people, a Hyundai car is perfectly good
quality, while others wouldn't buy anything 'less' than a BMW or Mercedes.
Sort of like asking 20 economists how to solve a country's economic woes!!

> Similarly, the user documentation for a product may or may not have a bearing on
> the quality of that product, but the documenting procedures that say how the
> product is produced, and how the conformity of that product is measured are both
> vital.

You have hit the biggest impact of ISO 9000 on technical writers here
Iain.  The documentation required to support an ISO registration is
forms the very foundation of the quality system it documents.
Without documented processes, people will do it their way, with
everybody doing it a little different.  The end result is wild
fluctuations in product quality, high rework/srap rates, and
correspondingly high costs.

> There is an interesting question about how, for instance, the user manual of
> software that a company uses becomes part of the quality documentation. Even if
> it is rarely looked at, being available for reference can make it a relevant
> part of the quality procedures documentation. That can mean that we are all
> involved in writing this stuff!

I think you will find most quality practitioners will look upon the
user manual as part of the product and _not_ part of the quality
procedures documentation.  As part of the product, the manual should
be held to the same requirement for verification and validation that
the software itself.  I certainly look for this, but as we all know,
rarely get it with a lot of the documentation out there (did I hear
M_ _ _ _ s _ _ t?)

My apologies to list members for my ramblings, but ISO is one of the
most misunderstood factors in todays business and it really is quite
straight forward.

Ralph E. Robinson
Author of the book "Documenting ISO 9000:  Guidelines for
Compliant Documentation" available through R2 Innovations
in Mississuaga, Ontario.

Email address = r2innovations -at- myna -dot- com
Website = http://www.myna.com/~r2innovn/main.htm

	http://www.documentation.com/, or http://www.dejanews.com/