Your pet peeve, technical or otherwise.

[james_s]

Yes, in some sense iso 9000 has always been a bit of a joke.  In principal, if you have a written process that says - "Check with Bob and do what he says" you are compliant.  It takes a little more than that, you have to have metrics that show you are following your proceeds.  But that can be covered by doing the checks with Bob in writing, recording his answers, and then some form of paper showing that you did what Bob said.

Pretty much, yes. I worked at a company that was ISO certified for a while and noticed the same thing. Contrary to common assumption, it didn't really have anything to check that what you're doing is adequate or makes sense, only that it's documented and that you're following the documented processes.

[vk6zgo]

Lots of this can be directed at ISO 9001. There is a lot of stress on the need for customer feedback so you can constantly improve systems.

Huh? ISO9001 has nothing to do with improvement. You have the wrong spec in mind. ISO9001 is about maintaining the level of quality you currently have, be that good or bad.

One employer I had was striving towards ISO9001, & religiously enforced the totally crap standard they had already reached, so that things were consistently bad!

[SilverSolder]

The opposite side of the ISO9000 coin is anarchy...   Either type of system is able to produce good output, but which is the way to bet? 

[CatalinaWOW]

As an aside, the confusion about continual improvement probably stems from a self inflicted wound.  If anything in your company's documented processes calls for continuous improvement the 9000 auditors will look for evidence that you are doing what you say.

[jbeng]

I agree that improvement needs to be continuous, but I can vouch for what some have said about the ISO system keeping product quality consistent and not really seeming to do much to improve it.  I have worked at four ISO-certified companies, one of which I was trained as an internal auditor.

The most notable one was an electronics contract manufacturer, where I was a repair technician (I was not an auditor in that case).  We had what was known as “the wall of shame”... a section of shelving ~24ft x 8ft (7m x 2.5m) stacked with anti-static containers of various assemblies awaiting repair, after having failed functional test.  It was estimated that product stored there totalled approx $1 million USD at any one given time.  A huge problem was that our technical group was constantly giving feedback to production about how to mitigate the issues we discovered, but in most instances we were ignored.  Management refused to follow the procedures required by ISO to make the changes which would allow them to build better product that would consistently pass FCT.  Therefore, quality remained the same and the amount of product on the “failed” shelves never got smaller.  They paid the assemblers extremely low wages and thus had constant employee turnover, all trained using the same flawed assembly procedures that management refused to address.

We suspected their ISO-certification was simply being used as a marketing tool and I didn’t remain at that company too long.  Oddly, they are still in business.

[coppice]

The opposite side of the ISO9000 coin is anarchy...   Either type of system is able to produce good output, but which is the way to bet? 

Nonsense. ISO9000 is a tick box. Nothing more. An organisation may have good processes in place to stabilise quality, and steadily improve it, or it may not. This is, however, only tangentially related to ISO9000. Remember, the Japanese were the first masters of stable consistent reliable mass production, while British defence contracting (not exactly known for high or consistent quality) is where ISO9000 originated.

[SiliconWizard]

You sound angry.

[coppice]

We suspected their ISO-certification was simply being used as a marketing tool and I didn’t remain at that company too long.  Oddly, they are still in business.

1) Have you ever been in an organisation that pushed hard to get or maintain ISO9000 certification, because they knew they needed to get their act together over quality?

2) Have you ever been in an organisation that pushed hard to get or maintain ISO9000 certification, because their business might suffer without the tick box ticked?

I'd guess most people have been in far more of 2) than 1). Most organisations will do anything to get that certification short of taking it seriously.

[SiliconWizard]

We suspected their ISO-certification was simply being used as a marketing tool and I didn’t remain at that company too long.  Oddly, they are still in business.

1) Have you ever been in an organisation that pushed hard to get or maintain ISO9000 certification, because they knew they needed to get their act together over quality?

2) Have you ever been in an organisation that pushed hard to get or maintain ISO9000 certification, because their business might suffer without the tick box ticked?

I'd guess most people have been in far more of 2) than 1). Most organisations will do anything to get that certification short of taking it seriously.

Yes of course, it's like diplomas.
Sure some people actually study to get skilled and knowledgeable in some area, and the diploma is just icing on the cake, but for many, they just want the diploma as a pass to get a good job, even if that means cheating to get it.

Do companies cheat? Yeah. Surprise.

But if done properly, ISO9001 can act as a *basic guide* to get a sensible organization. Even if most of the points in it are pretty obvious things really.
Getting ISO9001 certified is no big deal. Getting the certification is certainly no sign of a particularly proficient level of organization, but conversely, willing to get it and not managing to is usually a clear sign that something's wrong.
Anyone having worked in environments that require compliance with much more stringent standards will see ISO9001 as entertainment.

[mendip_discovery]

But if done properly, ISO9001 can act as a *basic guide* to get a sensible organization. Even if most of the points in it are pretty obvious things really.
Getting ISO9001 certified is no big deal. Getting the certification is certainly no sign of a particularly proficient level of organization, but conversely, willing to get it and not managing to is usually a clear sign that something's wrong.
Anyone having worked in environments that require compliance with much more stringent standards will see ISO9001 as entertainment.

9001 is a good way to get the basic layout for your business. It allows people to move from one business to another and know roughly what to expect. Business to business you get the advantage that you are hopefully talking a similar language. But in a lot of cases to be able to get work you need to at least have 9001 so therefore it's a tick box thing.

I am tasked with extending our 17025 scope and then also getting mechanical stuff on the scope so we can do work for more companies as it seems some of the Rolls Royce requirements and some of the industry standards are making comments that the labs used need to be 17025 accredited, though doesnt state that the calibration needs to be 17025.

[coppice]

But if done properly, ISO9001 can act as a *basic guide* to get a sensible organization. Even if most of the points in it are pretty obvious things really.

Some would argue that a book list of writings about how Japan became the world's leader in quality manufacturing would get you further.

[vk6zgo]

I agree that improvement needs to be continuous, but I can vouch for what some have said about the ISO system keeping product quality consistent and not really seeming to do much to improve it.  I have worked at four ISO-certified companies, one of which I was trained as an internal auditor.

The most notable one was an electronics contract manufacturer, where I was a repair technician (I was not an auditor in that case).  We had what was known as “the wall of shame”... a section of shelving ~24ft x 8ft (7m x 2.5m) stacked with anti-static containers of various assemblies awaiting repair, after having failed functional test.  It was estimated that product stored there totalled approx $1 million USD at any one given time.  A huge problem was that our technical group was constantly giving feedback to production about how to mitigate the issues we discovered, but in most instances we were ignored.  Management refused to follow the procedures required by ISO to make the changes which would allow them to build better product that would consistently pass FCT.  Therefore, quality remained the same and the amount of product on the “failed” shelves never got smaller.  They paid the assemblers extremely low wages and thus had constant employee turnover, all trained using the same flawed assembly procedures that management refused to address.

We suspected their ISO-certification was simply being used as a marketing tool and I didn’t remain at that company too long.  Oddly, they are still in business.

Sounds eerily like one company I worked for.

They were worse, though, treating anyone who found a problem with their processes as if they were "an enemy of the people"!

I got sacked for that reason, but the Dumbos were so useless that they asked me to stay on for a bit, "while they were looking for a replacement", then promptly forgot to do so.
I stayed there for another year or so, until I realised that my sanity was worth more than the meagre wage I received & quit.

[CatalinaWOW]

Well defined and consistent processes are a necessary, but not sufficient condition for having a world leading business.  The way I explained this to the zealots pushing these standards as the path to excellence was by citing this little paradox.

"If you could define a process for winning the Super Bowl (World Cup for those of that religion), then everyone would implement it and everyone would win"

These processes are a tool to pull yourself up to average if that is needed, and perhaps a little beyond.  But more is needed if you want to go further.

[SiliconWizard]

But if done properly, ISO9001 can act as a *basic guide* to get a sensible organization. Even if most of the points in it are pretty obvious things really.

Some would argue that a book list of writings about how Japan became the world's leader in quality manufacturing would get you further.

Oh yeah, this has also been tried extensively with the 5S stuff and all derived ones. Imitating doesn't make you japanese though. That has led to some nice failures.

If anything, the 5S zealots (outside of Japan) where often the ones claiming that following the method would automatically lead to excellence with no possibility of failing any project.

Whoever thinks following a given method is a silver bullet is an idiot, whether it's ISO9001 or any of these japanese methods. But from what I've seen, ISO9001 doesn't create nearly as blind and stubborn organizations as 5S/similar does, outside of Japan. And anyway, it's just a minimum as I and others have said. Not an end.

[coppice]

But if done properly, ISO9001 can act as a *basic guide* to get a sensible organization. Even if most of the points in it are pretty obvious things really.

Some would argue that a book list of writings about how Japan became the world's leader in quality manufacturing would get you further.

Oh yeah, this has also been tried extensively with the 5S stuff and all derived ones. Imitating doesn't make you japanese though. That has led to some nice failures.

If anything, the 5S zealots (outside of Japan) where often the ones claiming that following the method would automatically lead to excellence with no possibility of failing any project.

Whoever thinks following a given method is a silver bullet is an idiot, whether it's ISO9001 or any of these japanese methods. But from what I've seen, ISO9001 doesn't create nearly as blind and stubborn organizations as 5S/similar does, outside of Japan. And anyway, it's just a minimum as I and others have said. Not an end.

5S is a pretty weak goal these days. Even 30 years ago people in a number of countries were targeting, and achieving, 6. You don't have to be Japanese to make these ideas work. As with any process improvements, its attitude that determines how well it goes.

[eti]

There’s a member of my family who REFUSES to learn that parking a GARGANTUAN, TALL mug of water RIGHT NEXT TO MY LAPTOP is a terrible and rather selfish idea!

Mug: (it’s about 4-5” across and 8-9” deep, literally FULL TO THE BRIM - the VERY EDGE - with water, and being tall it has a high centre of gravity!)

I’ve asked again and again and again and again, politely “please use some LOGIC and sense, and don’t park that there - put it on the separate table behind you!”

Last summer, said person knocked a cup of water all over my Mums Chromebook keyboard for this very lack of spatial awareness I'm on about.

Words fail me. How are people SO DUMB?

[paulca]

Fans.  Fans in power supplies.  First my little 5A boost/buck starting WHRRRR'ing, then stalling.  Took it apart, replaced the fan with one that barely fits.

Not two days later, both the large 20A buck and it's 480W DC brick, developed fan "clattering" until you tap them a few times and/or they warm up first.

That's another 2 (or 3) fans I need to find... and rebuild the PSUs.

I suppose I should do the other PSU as well then.  5 years old most of them.

Adding thermal switches on them so they get used far less often is about all I can do to preserve them longer.  Or buy expensive ( but quiet) industrial grade fans.

[jonovid]

There’s a member of my family who REFUSES to learn that parking a GARGANTUAN, TALL mug of water RIGHT NEXT TO MY LAPTOP is a terrible and rather selfish idea!

Mug: (it’s about 4-5” across and 8-9” deep, literally FULL TO THE BRIM - the VERY EDGE - with water, and being tall it has a high centre of gravity!)

I’ve asked again and again and again and again, politely “please use some LOGIC and sense, and don’t park that there - put it on the separate table behind you!”

Last summer, said person knocked a cup of water all over my Mums Chromebook keyboard for this very lack of spatial awareness I'm on about.

Words fail me. How are people SO DUMB?

one of the rules of using a computer. food and beverages are consumed elsewhere.
because computers are expensive.   that is from the days of mainframe computer rooms!

[Bud]

Does that person believe in Feng Shui? If so then you have your answer 

[rdl]

I have 3 keyboards so I can rotate a clean one in after I spill something on the one in use.

[PlainName]

I have a (well, several, but just one in use) Dell SK-8115 which seems to be pretty much spill proof. The keys sit in a kind of dished tray which stops anything getting to the innards. There are even drain holes at the lowest point so a pool doesn't sit in there for too long.

[eti]

Does that person believe in Feng Shui? If so then you have your answer 

Feng Shui is bollocks. But I believe in uncommon sense!

[PlainName]

Garmin satnav setup

Great things once they're going (but you need an active cell data connection if you want safety camera notifications, even though the database is on the device  ) but getting them going... Today it took me literally three hours just to get my mobile talking to the thing. Sadly, that's not unusual - the one this satnav is replacing also took far too long to get a connection, and the one that replaced similarly was on the verge of being sent back as faulty before it Just Worked. Fortunately, they're too expensive to be having to do this very often, and once they are talking they are OK.

[SiliconWizard]

But if done properly, ISO9001 can act as a *basic guide* to get a sensible organization. Even if most of the points in it are pretty obvious things really.

Some would argue that a book list of writings about how Japan became the world's leader in quality manufacturing would get you further.

Oh yeah, this has also been tried extensively with the 5S stuff and all derived ones. Imitating doesn't make you japanese though. That has led to some nice failures.

If anything, the 5S zealots (outside of Japan) where often the ones claiming that following the method would automatically lead to excellence with no possibility of failing any project.

Whoever thinks following a given method is a silver bullet is an idiot, whether it's ISO9001 or any of these japanese methods. But from what I've seen, ISO9001 doesn't create nearly as blind and stubborn organizations as 5S/similar does, outside of Japan. And anyway, it's just a minimum as I and others have said. Not an end.

5S is a pretty weak goal these days. Even 30 years ago people in a number of countries were targeting, and achieving, 6. You don't have to be Japanese to make these ideas work. As with any process improvements, its attitude that determines how well it goes.

It's all in the attitude. And 7 is better than 6!

[IDEngineer]

It's all in the attitude.

I may raise a few hackles with this comment, but....

I've been at this long enough to see all sorts of "quality" programs come and go. Most of them seem to devolve to a bureaucratic report generation system that consumes time and money to generate reports that few actually read.

I've also seen lots of companies seek this-or-that "certification" just so they can list "ISOwhatever" on their website and literature as a bragging right.

I ignore all such labels. My criteria is "Focus on the Deliverable". I'm not buying their ISOxxxx certification, I'm buying their products. Do their products work well? Are they reliable? Do their existing customers still like them and would buy them again? If those are all positive then I don't need to care about ISOxxxx, and if they're negative all the ISOxxxx's in the world don't matter to me.