

|
The widely accepted ISO 9000 series of standards specifies requirements for a Quality Management System.
ISO 9000 was created by the British Standards Institute as BS 5750. The standard is now maintained by ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) and administered by accreditation and certification bodies.
It is widely accepted, although its high price and effort has led to many companies using alternatives such as IC9700, or IC9200, both of which are issued by the International Charter.
Some countries accepted ISO 9000 as their national standard. (e.g. IR 9000 in Iran).
Contents |
In World War II, United Kingdom, Britain had a serious problem with bombs going off in the weapons factories. In an attempt to solve the problem, the Ministry of Defense placed inspectors in the factories.
To supply to the Government, a company had to write up the procedure for making their product, have the procedure inspected by the Ministry and ensure their workers followed these procedures.
This, and similar problems in the nuclear/power industries over the following decades, were signs of rapid technological advance in manufacturing. Advances in science were pushed into manufacturing too fast to be properly managed. Furthermore, managers were seen as too often basing decisions on paper reports rather than on understanding what was happening on the factory floor.
In 1959, the United States developed Quality Program Requirements, a quality standard for military procurement, detailing what suppliers had to do to achieve conformance. By 1962, NASA had similarly developed Quality System Requirements for its suppliers. In 1968, NATO adopted the AQAP (Allied Quality Assurance Procedures) specifications for the procurement of NATO equipment.
The idea of quality assurance spread beyond the military. In 1966, the United Kingdom Goverment led the first national campaign for quality and reliability with the slogan "Quality is everybody's business." In 1969, the UK and Canada developed quality assurance standards for suppliers.
By this time, suppliers were being assessed by any number of their customers. It was widely recognized that this was a very wasteful duplication of effort. In 1969, a UK committee report on the subject recommended that suppliers' methods should be assessed against a generic standard of quality assurance.
In 1971, the British Standard Institute published the first UK standard for quality assurance, BS 9000, which was developed for the electronics industry. In 1974, BSI published BS 5179, Guidelines for Quality Assurance.
In order to shift the burden of inspection from the customer, quality assurance was guaranteed by the supplier through third-party inspection.
Through the 1970s, BSI organized meetings with industry to set a common standard. The result was BS 5750 in 1979. Key industry bodies agreed to drop their own standards and use it instead. The purpose of BS 5750 was to provide a common contractual document, demonstrating that industrial production was controlled.
The standard has evolved over several revisions.
ISO does not itself certify organizations. Many countries have formed accreditation bodies to authorize certification bodies, which audit organizations applying for ISO 9001 compliance certification. * note * It is not possible to be certified to ISO 9000. Although commonly referred to ISO 9000:2000 certification, the actual standard to which an organization's quality management can be certified is ISO 9001:2000. Both the accreditation bodies and the certification bodies charge fees for their services. The various accreditation bodies have mutual agreements with each other to ensure that certificates issued by one of the Accredited Certification Bodies (CB) are accepted world-wide.
The applying organization is assessed based on an extensive sample of its sites, functions, products, services, and processes and a list of problems ("action requests" or "non-compliances") made known to the management. If there are no major problems on this list, the certification body will issue an ISO 9001 certificate (see note above) for each geographical site it has visited once it receives a satisfactory improvement plan from the management showing how any problems will be resolved.
An ISO certificate is not a once-and-for-all award, but must be renewed at regular intervals recommended by the certification body — usually around 3 years.
Two types of auditing are required to become registered to the standard: auditing by an external certification body (external audit) and audits by internal staff trained for this process (internal audits). The aim is a continual process of review and assessment, to verify that the system is working as it's supposed to, find out where it can improve, and to correct or prevent problems identified. It is considered healthier for internal auditors to audit outside their usual management line, so as to bring a degree of independence to their judgements.
Under the 1994 standard, the auditing process could be adequately addressed by performing "compliance auditing":
Under the 2000 standard, the approach should be different, reflecting the different aspects and the processs approach. While the auditor does perform some similar functions, they are expected to go beyond mere auditing for 'compliance' and to focus on risk, status and importance. This means they are expected to make more judgements on what is effective (or not), rather than merely adhering strictly and safely to what is formally prescribed. The difference could be exemplified thus: Under the 1994 version, the question was broadly: are you doing what the manual says you should be doing? whereas under the 2000 version, the question is more: will this process help you achieve your stated objectives? is it a good process or is there a better one/way to do it better?
The ISO 19011 standard for auditing should be applied to ISO 9000.
ISO 9000 is composed of the following sections:
There are many different standards which are referenced in ISO 9001 family. A lot of them do not even carry "ISO 900x" numbers. For example, parts of the 10,000 range are also considered part of the 9000 family: ISO 10007:1995 discusses Configuration management, which for most organizations is just one element of a complete management system.
To the casual reader, it is usually sufficient to understand that when an organization claims to be "ISO 9000 compliant", it means they conform to ISO 9001:2000.
The ISO website and documentation give more detail on what each specification entails.
As the paragraphs and clauses of the ISO 9001 standard have always been very generalized and abstract, they have to be carefully interpreted to make sense within a particular organization. Developing software is not like making cheese or offering counseling services, yet the ISO 9001 guidelines, because they are Business Management guidelines can be applied to each of these industries. It should be noted that diverse organizations such as Police Departments (US), Professional Soccer Teams (Mexico) and City Councils (UK) have successfully implemented ISO 9001:2000 systems.
Over time, various industry sectors have wanted to standardize their interpretations of the guidelines within their own marketplace.
Criticisms of ISO 9000 generally concern inappropriate application or extension of its use in companies, and the effect this can have on organizational culture.
While the criticism focuses on the standard, the problems typically arise from a failure of organisations to understand the underlying philosophy and the fact that the standard describes a process-driven systematic approach. Benefits will be difficult to achieve where incomplete or incoherent implementations of ISO 9001-based quality management systems prevail.
The intent is that an organization implementing a management system based on ISO 9001 will have defined processes which enable it to clearly identify and understand 'customer' requirements - including understanding who the customer actually is - translate those requirements into deliverable products or services and then deliver those products or services on time and in a manner which completely satisfies the customer. Nothing black magic - just plain common sense.
These problems were particularly pronounced with the ISO 9000:1994 revision. The 2000 revision was in part an attempt to address such criticisms, however inappropriate application of a standard is no reason to blame the document itself. Bad management practices have existed since long before ISO 9001 and will continue long after.
There are few objective metrics showing any effectiveness for ISO 9001. In 1997, two people took the BSI to the Advertising Standards Authority for claiming in an advertisement that ISO 9001 "improves productivity ... almost always gives an immediate result in terms of productivity and efficiency, and that means cost reductions ... pays for itself ... Staff morale is better because they understand what is expected of them and each other," whilst being unable to produce any objective metrics to substantiate these assertions. The complaint was upheld. However had the complainants studied US literature they would have discovered several surveys which show worth-while improvements to productivity, reduced scrap and waste and enhanced customer satisfaction from organizations using the Standards. (See QSU website).
Quality programmes are notoriously difficult to quantify as Crosby warned in 'Quality is Free' back in 1970, long before the first of these standard emerged. When an organization is measuring nothing, the only 'quality costs' it knows are the basics of scrap and rework, and often even these are not being tracked effectively. Once a formal system is introduced, much more accurate data starts to emerge and initial costs of quality often appear to increase, however stabilizing processes frequently produces quite dramatic drops in scrap and failure rates.
In Japan, amidst complaints of ISO 9000 undermining world-class thinking, Toyota abandoned the standard in 2000, moving back to their in-house Toyota Production System. However it should be understood that the 'Toyota Method' involves measuring everything constantly. Assurance isn't much of the process.
{Needs revision}