Not really new. The ISO 9001 reputation has long been of dubious
significance. ISO 9001 rarely helps a good company which is already
doing the right things. On the other hand, ISO 9001 rarely helps a
company that is doing the wrong things anyway. Add in the problems with
registrars and auditors, it has long been looked upon by a great many
people as a money machine and little more.
In article <1169621975_18301@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Tim
<Timbob@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> It's too bad that ISO is starting to get a tarnished reputation among
some
> people. I've worked with companies that took it very seriously, and
derived
> significant benefits from implementing and following their quality
system.
> And I've also worked for (briefly) a company that simply wanted the
> certificate on the wall, but had absolutely no interest in actually
following
> their quality system. The recertification audit was a nightmare.
>
> I've even witnessed company owners take out auditors and got them drunk
at
> lunch. The company passed the audit, which they did not deserve.
> Reprehensible behavior to be sure, on the part of the company owners and
the
> auditors.
>
> But I don't believe we ought to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
ISO
> can be a wonderful tool for organizations who take it seriously. I do
wish
> there was a better way to "police" the auditors. It too often seems to
be
> only about getting company's money.
