Scott Ellliott says:
(some original and all quotes snipped)
>2. ISO9000 methodology does not start with business results. It basically
>says "document what you do and do what you documented", it doesn't care if
>you satisfy customers or make money.
This is one of the sad parts of the realm of systems and standards, models
and money. ISO/QS/AS standards are based upon sound ideas and can easily
be turned into a strong quality system if the primary focus is improvement
instead of registration.
>3. ISO provides a way to store knowledge, but it does not provide a way to
>learn new knowledge. A Knowledge organization is not necessarily a
I've used both the training and corrective and preventive action elements
of the standards to build intelligent databases which can be used to
research current needs/problems/opportunities in the light of learning
history and always include cause and effect analysis and pointers to more
thinking tools in the procedures. Used as a system, they can and do
generate new ideas. Unfortunately, the registrars and assessors focus
solely on compliance and the letter of the standard, often extending the
notions of documentation and data controls into a bureaucratic
nonsensically far beyond that needed to understand and use a system.
>All that said, I also believe that ISO9000 has value for other reasons,
>and can be very helpful in improving quality if taken in the right
John Zavacki email@example.com Wolff Group, Inc. 800-282-1218 http://www.wolff.com
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <firstname.lastname@example.org> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>