Talk:ISO 9000/Archive 1

Unclear jargon
I read this article and still have no idea what ISO9000 is - this entire article is incomprehensible gobbledy-gook. --Kelt65 12:41, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


 * That's normal. Part of the problem, at least, is that one needs to be the stereotypical pin-headed bureaucrat to really understand all the circumlocution, puffery, self-justification and nonsense which comprise this vaunted global "standard". ==ILike2BeAnonymous 17:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

This page looks like it has been computer-translated into English. For example, "central electricity that generates the plate (Joined Kingdom)" looks like it should be "Central Electricity Generating Board (United Kingdom)". Unfortunately, I know nothing about ISO 9000, so maybe somebody who does could do a clean-up.

Tony.
 * The broken translation actually replaces far better original, see version around early 2005 stating In World War II, Britain had a serious problem with bombs going off in munitions factories, compared to the current In WWII, England had a serious problem with the bombs that came out of munitions plants.. A request for cleanup was added by 83.70.64.1 but this was quietly removed a minute later by user:199 under the guise Rv vandalism. This brings an entirely new meaning to the word vandalism. As I have demonstrated above this article is in real need of being tidied up. In order to avoid edit wars with and censoring by 199 I put up the reasoning and the request here.
 * user:199 admits on his own web pages that

I've created a new name as I don't want to bring up old arguments with several unsavoury editors who are still contributing today. Time to start afresh!

Re-vamping
I did a lot of work to make the article more understandable and accessible. DavidMack 19:39, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Latest version
The article says: The latest version is [ISO 9001]:2000.

Isn't the latest version ISO 9001:2001? 

Latest version IS ISO 9001:2000 and not ISO 9001:2001. user:qualitytimes

Now the latest is ISO 9001:2008 Thequality (talk) 04:05, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Start afresh
Cut from intro:


 * overseeing the production of a product or service. It is not a standard for ensuring a product or service is of quality; rather, it attests to the process of production, and how it will be managed and reviewed

I'm a native speaker of English and an engineer, but I do not understand what the above verbiage is trying to say. It sounds like a mass of buzzwords to me.

What does "attests to the process of production" mean? And if I can't figure this out, how will our average reader figure it out?

My understanding is that Quality Control processes are concerned with ensuring that the outputs (goods or services) are fit to purpose (not caring how they're produced) whereas Quality Assurance processes are concerned with ensuring that the outputs have been produced in accordance with the documented standard (not caring if they're fit for purpose). ISO9000 is a standard for Quality Assurance processes. A major criticism of ISO9000:1987 and :1994 was their "just say what you do and then do what you say" approach. That is to say, their lack of an objective 'standard' against which a Quality System could be measured. An holistic approach to Quality Management covers both Quality Control and Quality Assurance - have we delivered a service / produced goods that are fit to purpose AND did we do it in the manner documented in our Quality System?

ISO900:2001 introduced the concept of metrics for Quality Management and Continuous Improvement. These concepts should allow firms to measure the effectiveness of their Quality System and to make changes in order to improve. Eurmal (talk) 11:19, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm disappointed in the quality of writing I've seen in Wikipedia's category:Quality series. Uncle Ed 14:40, 26 October 2005 (UTC)


 * There was a short article here, I made it a longer one, then someone else added responses to criticisms inline ("however it does not in fact suck if you were not EDUCATED STUPID!!!"), including calling John Seddon a bozo. The history page may help in cleaning this one up - David Gerard 11:27, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Criticism of Criticism
--203.2.182.254 04:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

The Criticism section is poor and POV.

Every criticism of ISO 9000 in this section is immediately countered with some kind of "but not if people do it right" comment. This mocks the criticisms. There are authorities that don't agree with the described benefits of ISO 9000. Their complaints should be listed fairly to maintain NPOV.

If no one comes up with a better plan, I'm going to remove the counter-comments.

--A D Monroe III 02:07, 18 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Done. --A D Monroe III 17:02, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I am new to studying ISO9000, but I can see many problems, hence I am beginning to see why some people refer to it as "pronounced as eyesore" and claim that it is erzats for good industrial practices. Take the nearest example. Wikipedia shows that the Tsuji fishmerchant displays that his fish is ISO 9000 compliant. Does the 9000 specify how much poison, such as mercury for example, in the fish is acceptable for human consumption or only says that the merchant must wash his hand before carving up the fish and carefully record it? It is doubtful that any qualitative and quantitative analysis was carried out.

Technical standards must exist to enable a designer to design, as he must know the tensile strength etc. of a piece of steel or what standard length measurements to use. My theory is very simple. Engineering and other technical subjects are complex c.f with the study of history or other social sciences. Hence fewer and fewer people are prepared to study engineering. They also want to have jobs where they can sit around and earn good money. As these parasites are now in the majority they are calling the shots and make life more and more complicated by dreaming up all kinds of airy fairy rules and standards and restrictions. ISO 9001 is one of them.


 * If you want technical standards, you should look under ASME or ANSI (and their counterparts); not ISO. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.71.226.254 (talk) 20:05, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Progress has been made on the Criticism (or "Debate over effectiveness...") section, but it is still quite woeful. The "summary" is a load of rubbish and undermines the section entirely. It's like having a "Critical Reception" of the movie "Gigli" but saying at the end "But really people have to realize it's a great movie". No, the criticisms are valid and having a positive summary is contradictory and insulting. The fact is that IS0 9000 enforces a CONTROL culture rather than an UNDERSTANDING culture - it requires management to enforce policies rather than to understand their business. It destroys quality by focusing on process rather than the outcome. If there is any "summary" statement it should be that ISO 9000 panders to managers' desires to ignore the most important part of their business (their product) and instead gives them a set of "how things should be" procedures to whack people with when in fact they have no understanding of "why things are the way they are" (which is what matters). It like telling an athlete "run 100 meters in 8 seconds" and then checking back in a week rather than... uh, training the athlete! High quality companies either don't use ISO 9000 (like Toyota) or they ignore it and focus on UNDERSTANDING and IMPROVING existing procedures rather than just telling everyone what to do.--203.2.182.254 04:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Standard and Registration are seperate
There is a difference between the standard and registration to the standard that perhaps should be made clear in the text. For example the sentance below implies registration. It also does not have a neutral POV:

"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."

If there are no objections i am going to delete --Darrylv 00:25, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Origins
I'm reasonably sure that ISO 9000 was not initially created by BS5750. I think it would be more accurate to say that BS5750 was the first quality system standard that brought 3rd party certification schemes. Or BS5750 was one of the predecessors of the ISO9000 family.

"ISO 9000 was created by the British Standards Institute as BS 5750. "

ISO 9000 was "created" by ISO TC 176, an international commitee.

--Darrylv 15:21, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

What is "world-class thinking"?
I seem to understand all the words, but when put together they lose their meaning. Can anyone with a better command of the English language enlighten me as to the meaning of this phrase? Shinobu 10:59, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * It's management-speak for "innovation" - coming up with new ideas. FiggyBee 13:21, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh. Should we change it then? Isn't it better to write down "innovation" when you mean "innovation"? Shinobu 08:20, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Removed Paragraph
I removed the following para from 'History'. It doesn't seem to fit into that section of the article, and also seems rather POV.

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.

FiggyBee 13:21, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

IC9700 and IC9200
Forgive me if I'm breaking any protocols here. I am quite new to Wikipedia but familiar with ISO 9000.

I'd like to challenge:

1) the statement that "high costs and difficulties with implementation have led to many companies using alternatives such as IC9700 or IC9200".

2) The claim (in the Wikipedia article for IC9200) that it is a popular program.

I base this challenge on my having asked several colleagues who are well-placed in the ISO 9000 scene, none of whom have heard of these programs nor of ICharter. I apologise in advance if they (or I) are merely ignorant of the facts. I have contacted ICharter to draw their attention to these comments. Jim Wade 08:37, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Go ahead and make the edit. I'm also involved with iso9000 and had never heard of them so calling them popular may be an overstatement..  --Darrylv 20:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * OK Jim Wade 05:12, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Reference texts
Anyone know of any good reference texts? I'd like to give a specific example but it is probably "Original Research". I had years of product-management experience in one aspect of ISO 9001, the engineering/product-development cycle. Where I worked I was one of two original designers of their product-design/engineering "milestone" process that we used and the company still uses, very successfully. These are a series of "milestones" that you first define and have to adhere to.

The ISO 9001 process had a huge number of "pieces" that affected all levels of the organization, top to bottom ... everything -- purchasing, manufacturing, engineering, production, quality-control, returned-goods, shipping, service, in-house repair.... Every business-process that affected the quality of goods and services to the customer had to be written into "procedures", available on-line to all employees, and the employees were expected to know and to follow them. Then internal auditors-- all sorts of unexpected folks from the shop floor, for instance -- would be trained to go around and do audits e.g. of the product-design process, or a business-process (order-entry, purchasing, service). When they found problems the process was "pink slipped" and solutions were required of the managers. Each product team (there were three or four) had weekly quality meetings where the auditors would present their findings. This was on top of normal quality reports. Then, once a year, external audits were performed by ISO 9001 folks from Canadian Standards Association (and I believe they were certified by some ISO process themselves).

What's interesting about ISO 9000 is: I'm not sure the internal auditing and quality-meetings were specifically required by ISO 9000 or the company used it to fulfill the broader ISO quality-to-customer requirements. The base documents are remarkably scant/thin/broad/non-specific. The sort of expertise to set up an ISO 9001 process is why ISO 9000 consultants cost lots of money. But basically the rule is: if you write it into a procedure, and the external auditors agree it fulfills the ISO quality requirements of the level you choose (9001, 2 or 3), you have to follow the procedure. And you're tested on it.

I have no idea how one would go about putting experience such as mine into an encyclopedia article. It would probably be considered Original Research, anyways. The problem is: ISO 9000 is a huge topic. If anyone knows of any books like "ISO 9001 for Dummies" they would help the Wiki readers by referencing them on the article page. That quest is what sent me here -- I wanted to give a correspondent a reference re "the engineering product design cycle".wvbaileyWvbailey 17:34, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Contents
Added the 6 "key procedures" that the standard requires. Discordian 20:33, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Spam links
So, there are lots of "external links", most probably selling services related to ISO 9000, and are effectively spam. What guidelines should we set up for removing them? Only purely informational sites that don't sell anything? Stevage 20:56, 20 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Spam Links comment from Marc T Smith - ISO 9001 and the ISO 9000 series of standards is in the quality assurance arena which I am very versed in. I have gone through a fair number of quality related articles here, as well as articles unrelated to quality, and if you make the rule that only sites that do not sell anything ("only purely informational sites") will be allowed, there will be one heck of a lot of links dropped. Examples: The iSixSigma.com (which has more flashing advertisements than Broadway in NYC) and the Elsmar.com sites are two sites which are technically commercial sites, but which have excellent free resources. Considering all the commercial links one finds as one browses Wikipdia pages there are many commercial sites referenced. I would hope you will consistently apply rules across Wikipedia. 15:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Why is there a link to Oxebridge? It's a company advertising its wares. I thought commercial links were not allowed. (Anonymous)


 * I removed a couple of spam links and labeled a couple of others that provided good information but were commercial sources.
 * DavidMack 01:41, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I removed a commercial link and it was put back again. The link was to *ISO 9001 explained by Centre for ISO9000&mdash; from Centre for ISO9000 This is a consultant's website with only a small amount of useful information. The site obviously exists primarily to sell products or services, contrary to External links. The link exists mainly to promote the website, and may contravene the requirement to "avoid linking to a website that you own, maintain or represent." DavidMack 21:43, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Spam link was put back again. Special:Contributions/217.45.209.217 is making a career of keeping certain links alive. I put a spam warning on his talk page. DavidMack 21:12, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Interesting fact!
Stumbled upon the following interesting fact while searching for ISO9000 information. Can we mention it somewhere in the article?

Shaastra, the annual science and technology festival of the Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, India is the first student managed event in the world to earn the ISO 9001:2000 certification. 155.69.5.234 12:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Corrections
An earlier version states "ISO 9000 ... [pertains] to how a product is produced, rather than how it is designed." This is not true. To comply with ISO 9001:2000 a company must document and monitor any design and development activities as well as production.

I changed one section title from Contents of ISO 9000 to Contents of ISO 9001 -- hope that was correct.

DavidMack 01:41, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Stop the "whack-a-mole" edits!
I want the user who keeps inserting this link stopped. It's getting really annoying. They never even bother to post an edit summary; the link just keeps reappearing. Enough already! +ILike2BeAnonymous 20:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree. See bottom of section on spam links above. DavidMack 00:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Review of links
Below are some comments on links that have at various times been placed in the article. I think the best way to deal suspected spam is to improve the article so that the spam links become unnecessary, while still referencing commercial websites where appropriate. I'll be working on this article during Feb 2007.
 * www.iso9000.co.uk: The stated purpose is "to help you to produce your own ISO 9001 system without spending a fortune in doing so." The site provides a helpful overview mixed with recommendations to call in the consultants. For example, the page on "making your own system" includes the advice
 * "get lots of feedback from the people using the system, at all levels."
 * "Use our services to review your system and advise you..."
 * www.simplyquality.org. Stated purpose: "Dedicated to helping organizations understand and implement ... ISO 9000." The top half of the web page has some practical FAQs about ISO 9000. Lower down there are some links to papers and online resources. The rest of the page and website lists books and services for sale.
 * www.iso9000council.org. Stated purpose is misleading -as the site is owned by the companies they "recommend". SCAM!
 * www.oxebridge.com/downloads.asp Stated purpose: "Free Guidance Documents." A page of PDF downoads that are not of central importance to the topic ISO 9000, e.g. "How to Ensure a Fair Registration Audit." Website by a provider of ISO 9001 implementation services.
 * www.driso.co.uk/resources/resources.html "Educational Articles." A collection of practical, short articles on ISO 9000 by a provider of consultant services.

DavidMack 18:24, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll add another one for consideration that's previously been in the article:
 * http://elsmar.com/Forums/forumdisplay.php?f=24 the ISO 9001 sub-forum of the larger Elsmar.com forums - hosted by a provider of consultant services. &mdash; Zaui (talk) 18:35, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * http://www.hdmgmt.co.uk/gam.html is blatant spam. "H.D. Management has worked with many blue-chip finance houses over the past 10 years." etc. — DavidMack 18:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Personally I found the following to be much better than the ISO site list, which is just a list of links to sites that contain lists: However, someone has deleted it and replaced it with the former. I think that some editors should remember that official site content is not always the best or most appropriate content.
 * ISO 9000 Registration Bodies by country
 * Thanks for your input, and please make the changes you see appropriate. — DavidMack 23:34, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I think we have a good quality article here that does not need a lot of extra links describing ISO. So I'm removing commercial or self-promoting links. Below are some more that have appeared. — DavidMack 15:08, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * www.vca.gov.uk "approval authority for new road vehicles ...", "leading European approval and quality/environmental management system certification body...", "... flexible service, ready to meet our customers' needs."
 * www.moodyint.com "... a leading international technical services company committed to continuous improvement"

History section
I deleted the history section after I found that it was copied and pasted from http://www.proquis.com/page.asp?page=163. We need a new, rewritten section.

DavidMack 22:45, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Typographical errors
I corrected a few typographical errors and also deleted a statement that simply said 'It's over 9000', which had no meaning whatsoever.

The article needs a good proof read.

Beefy_SAFC 17:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

9000? why?
Please, could someone please add - right at the start - why is it 9000? Does the number mean anything at all? If it does not, then someone should put that in. Fremte 20:21, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

9000 is simply a number and given to a family of standards for the purpose of identification.( ISO 9000 series contains ISO 9000,ISO 9001 and ISO 9004 standards) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.200.234.66 (talk) 05:55, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Does anyone know what any of these people is talking about ? I just wanted a simple explination of ISO and I got all this, my last time to use this site

Follow up: I don't know enough to rewrite the intro or I would. Here's what I would hope to see:

There is ISO 9000 which is a family of standards develeoped by whom, when, and updated with what frequency which includes what (e.g. 9001:2000, X, X, etc?) each of which will be discussed further below.

Naming Conventions- this is what makes this article SO confusing: The part of the name before the colon refers to XXXX, the part after refers to XXXX or distinguishes when it was written? or the order of updating? or distinguishes which series? manufacturing, laboratory, service???? ISO X:X for example refers to. ISO X:X

There are how many XXX? (series? updates? part before the colon) and how many YYYY (part after the colon)

The following are what each Y refers to......

I'm just a student trying to make sense of this, and Wickipedia is not being very helpful. I imagine others find it similarly obscure simply because of the naming confusion.

Somewhere it the article someone says something like, due to public ignorance of the standards companies can advertise their product as ISO 9000 compliant....from the article it is NOT clear what WOULD be appropriate, and why this is (presumably) laughable.Rpcvmom (talk) 00:31, 6 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rpcvmom (talk • contribs) 00:29, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Public Impact of ISO9000
It seems to me that the ISO9000 system is intended to have a positive impact on the goods and services delivered to the public. If that is the case, why is there no apparent effort to encourage the public to demand ISO certification for products and services that it buys?

ISO9000 certification seems to be largely invisible to the public. I see no products or services that advertise certification as a marketing advantage. Maybe that is a result of a complete lack of public education about the standard, and it's impact on goods and services.

All the literature I have found about this useful quality assurance system is about the mechanics and procedures of implementation and maintenance of the system itself, and nothing about how important it is to the end user.

To put a really sharp point on this issue, if ISO9000 certification were visible on consumer products like toothpaste, then the recent problems with contaminated toothpaste would be known in advance.

Another aspect of ISO9000 as a social force is that distributors and resellers should prominently display ISO certifications for the products they sell to the public, so the consumer can use that information in the purchase decisions.

Have I missed something? PebblesInMouth 15:25, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

The Thalys website has a neat looking logo with the words "certified ISO9001 by BVQi". Ironically I found this on their contact page which doesn't include any contact address or email, but only a premium rate number for customer support. With even more irony I was looking for a contact to enquire why it is impossible to make a reservation on the website! Way to go ISO9001 and BVQi. As an engineer and a project manager I've worked on ISO9000 and the BS (no pun intended) equivalent on several occasions, and I have to say they are useless paper exercises designed to keep bureaucrats and consultants employed. Oh back to the point at hand, "ISO9001 effect on customers"? None! Other than to increase operating costs and hence end-user prices. 82.123.23.4 21:34, 26 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I think ISO 9000 is used more business to business. It doesn't guarantee a quality product, just that you hope that an ISO business is more reliable and maybe easier to deal with if there's a problem. If the marketing people can sell products to the public better with "ISO" written on them, then they should get on with it. Ditto the ISO 14000 for environmental aspect. — DavidMack 14:34, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Although manufacturing is the largest adopter of ISO 9000, the standards are intended to apply to al types of businesses, including electronics and chemicals, and to service the health care, banking, and transportations. The evolution of the standard has shed its manufacturing roots and made it easier for service companies to apply (Managing for Quality and Performance Excellence, 7th Ed., Evans & Lindsay, p. 131). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.125.36.194 (talk) 20:50, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

This article needs more life, more information and clear explantion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 164.164.13.23 (talk • contribs).

As per my understanding ISO certification marks can not be put on Product but it can be published on the packing material saying it was a product of ISO certified company or else. ISO 9001 is a mangement standard and certifies Management who's posses and demonstrate the requirements of ISO 9001 standard. The product from ISO certified company may be good or poor. System must take care all the non conforming aspects during production and later on.( one of the requirement) so the system evolve and the finaly effects on the product. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.200.234.66 (talk) 06:10, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

New section on ISO 2008
Good material was added. But the general discussion of ISO application needs to be moved out to the other relevant sections. — DavidMack 20:50, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Truncated History Section
On September 12, 2007, 202.125.156.122 truncated most of the history section. Currently, the section does not even finish with a complete sentence. Is there a reason why the history section should not be restored? -- JCarlson486 18:24, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


 * No reason that I could see, so I restored it. --Orlady 18:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Usefull section —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.200.234.66 (talk) 11:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

The FDIS of ISO 9001:2008 is now published. The revised standard is set for formal public issue "some time in October 2008" - but don't expect anything drastic. There are, in effect, no new requirements at all, and the changes between ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 9001:2008 (FDIS) are merely a relatively short collection of typographic edits. For anyone who is interested, I've been through the FDIS with a fine tooth comb and I have summarised the changes in this article on my blog

http://blog.capablepeople.co.uk/blog/_archives/2008/9/19/3891501.html

Hope you find it useful

Shaun Sayers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.20.98.160 (talk) 13:02, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality of "Debate on the effectiveness of ISO 9000" section
Someone added the "neutrality in dispute" message with the explanation "there may be citations but there is a lot of point of view wording surrounding them." In my view the section gives a balanced perspective on pros and cons. The POV arguments are drawn from the references to make an effective summary of the controversy. Please explain what you mean by POV and how you think this section should be improved. — DavidMack 18:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC) P.S. If you want POV, take a look at this section at the beginning of this year.
 * Since there has been no reply, I am removing the "neutrality in dispute" message. — DavidMack (talk) 00:22, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

comment added by 192.100.124.219 (talk) 11:04, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The current "Debate" section is very pro-ISO 9000 POV. The previous version removed by DavidMack was anti-ISO 9000, but that is a valid opposing POV.  There exists debate on whether IS0 9000 is worthwile.  That debate should be noted in this article.  --A D Monroe III (talk) 02:10, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

ISO 9000 stops improvements in small and middle sized firms
Statement: ISO 9000 stops improvements in small and middle sized firms !!!!!

Why?

Because these firms do not have the capacity to implement and uphold ISO 9000 the way it should. The best way to improve fast is to find the most important problem to solve and go from one to the next. Small and middle sized firms can not combine this with the effort ISO 9000 asks from them. Since ISO 9000 focusses on all the aspect of the organisation at ones. ISO 9000 does not discriminate between important en non-important issues. It asks you to solve all kinds of issues first before you can start to improve your process. And while your organisation changes continuessly because of external forces, you even keep legging behind whith your ISO9000-system. That's why ISO 9000 kills innovation in small and middle sized firms (as well as their flexibility).

Incremental adoptation of ISO 9000
Absolutely. Incremental adaptation of ISO 9000 needs to be prioritized according the 80-20 rule.


 * Agile manufacturing
 * Lean manufacturing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.138.64.57 (talk) 02:39, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Summary
I was thinking if it were useful to assemble some of the one-sentence simple "summaries" (or however one calls them), e.g.:


 * "Do it right, the first time, every time."
 * "Do what you say. Say what you do."

Any thoughts? Best regards, Stan J. Klimas (talk) 22:18, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

The rules are updated, the time and changes in the requirements for quality, motivate change.
This is nonsense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.140.57.113 (talk) 14:03, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

ISO 9004
ISO 9004 redirects to the ISO 9000 article, but there's no mention of it at all in the article. 87.80.97.137 (talk) 16:25, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Definitions
I reached this article through searching for the meaning of "product realization". Maybe it would be appropriate to add a one-sentence description at the beginning of the section on product realization (in section 7). Nechamayaniger (talk) 07:17, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

AQAP Series
In the "Industry-specific interpretations" section the NATO AQAP 2110, 2120, 2130 series should be included, for historical reasons too (the AQAP-110 possibly was the first standard on Quality Management systems). (fpasello) 10:25, 10 July 2010 (CET) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fpasello (talk • contribs)

The following is taken from a draft of an in-progress academic research articles on ISO, and may be on target. I have not had the ocassion to contribute before, so if this is incorrectly done, my apologies.

Table 2.1: Recent Chronology of ISO 9000 Development Year / Event

1941 US War Department imposed statistical quality control standards on war material suppliers

1950 US Air Force issued MIL-Q-5923, Control of Aircraft and Associated Equipment

1959 US Department of Defense (DOD) established MIL-Q-9858 quality management program

1963 DOD revised MIL-Q-9858 to MIL-Q-9858A

1968 North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) adopted quality program requirement divisions of MIL-Q-9858A to produce Allied Quality Assurance Publication 1 (AQAP-1)

1970 UK Ministry of Defense adopted provisions of ADAP-1 as Management Program Defense Standard (DEF/STAN 05-8)

1979 British Standards Institute (BSI) developed Commercial Quality Standard BS 5750

1980 ISO TC 176 began work on ISO 9000

1987 International Organization for Standardization issued ISO 9000b

1987 American Society for Quality Control (ASQC) adopted ISO 9000 standards as ANSI/ASQC Q90 Standards

1987 BSI revised BS 5750 to be identical to ISO 9000 standards

1992 NATO began revising Quality System Standards to include ISO 9000

1994 Secretary of Defense authorized the use of the ISO 9000-ANSI/ASQC Q90 series for new programs and, as appropriate, for ongoing programs (note)

2000 ISO 9001: 2000 issued

2008 ISO 9001: 2008 issued

Note: John Deutch, Under Secretary of Defense, Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments, Directors of Defense Agencies, Use of Commercial Standards in the Department of Defense (DoD), 14 February 1994.

Source: Adapted from Hollis G. Bray, Jr. (1997), expanded and updated.

citation: Hollis G. Bray, Jr., (1997) "ISO 9000 in Construction," Journal of Construction Education, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 182-192. Last-resort-uname (talk) 12:51, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Specific document
The section on "Scope" seemed to be an extract from a specific named company's Quality Manual. I have made this more generic. InelegantSolution (talk) 11:49, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

ISO 9000 User Survey
Apologies, I am new to Wikipedia. I would like to add a short paragraph in the opening section as follows: ISO/TC 176/SC2 is considering whether ISO 9001 and ISO 9004 (and related standards in the ISO 9000 family) should be revised, and what such revisions should consist of. The ISO 9000 online user survey is available in 11 languages here.

I believe that this is factually correct and uncontroversial.

P.S. I would like to be able to edit this page; I was personally involved in the development of ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 9001:2008 and I am working on the next revision.

Rottenrow (talk) 15:50, 15 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Welcome to Wikipedia! You have raised two issues:


 * 1) Your first problem of not being able to edit the article is due to non-autoconfirmed users being locked from editing. The article was protected in this way (semi-protection) due to persistent vandalism. Your account is already more than 4 days old, so once you have made more than ten edits elsewhere this will no longer be a barrier to you editing. If you are keen to get the change in before you are autoconfirmed, please propose the change here and another editor can make them on your behalf (if they agree with your proposal).
 * 2) The second problem you have is a known conflict of interest. You should take care that any contributions are seen to be neutral (see Neutral point of view). Contributions that appear to be promoting your projects rather than neutral clarifications and independently sourced statements of fact are likely to be reverted and you may be challenged for your neutrality. However many subject experts contribute to Wikipedia and you need be no exception. I have added some guidance material to your talk page. If you are in doubt about making a significant change to the article, please propose your changes here a day or two in advance first (or point to some draft text in your userspace) to give an opportunity to create a consensus (or at least to show a lack of objection). Thanks, Fæ (talk) 16:22, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Removal of copyrighted content
The major part of the section "Contents of ISO 9001" was a confirmed copyright violation, as it cited lengthy parts of the document itself ad verbatim. It has been removed per OTRS complaint (Ticket 2011020110006057). Please do not use copyrighted text. Asav (talk) 15:05, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Huh?
This article has a lot of verbage but dosnt seem to say anything informative. Its as if you had an article about bananas that said everything you could possibly say about bananas EXCEPT describing an actual banana. Why not include the ISO 9001 list of eight quality management principles given here: http://www.iso.org/iso/qmp Obviously could be copyright problems if they were just copied, but I have seen them elsewhere on the web. 2.101.12.198 (talk) 12:36, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Content from Standards.org
I have twice added a reference to the ISO 9001 content on Standards.org, a portal that support international standards and provides valuable information on the ISO 9001 management scheme. Whenever this link is added, it is subsequently removed by someone else as apparent 'link spam'. I think this content should be reviewed as it provides more specialist content on the management scheme than what is available on Wikipedia. (87.194.223.119 (talk) 11:43, 19 August 2011 (UTC))

Misleading phrase?
"A company can intend to produce a poor quality product and providing it does so consistently and with the proper documentation can put an ISO 9001 stamp on it."

This is not correct for two reasons: SV1XV (talk) 18:39, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * A company with an ISO 9001 system may produce a product of inferior quality only if it conforms to the requirements of its customers. It cannot produce an inferior product and misrepresent it with a false statement of conformity. So a steel mill may produce and sell rimmed steel under a ISO 9001 system, however it may not mislabel it as semi-killed steel.
 * It is not allowed to put an ISO 9001 stamp on a product, as this standard does not contain requirements and specifications for any product and ISO 9001 certification does not imply anything specific about the product. For example seamless steel pipe is stamped with a product specification like "SA-106 Grade B" or "EN 10216 P235GH" etc, not with "ISO 9001". Most certification bodies issue a non-conformity if they see an unqualified "ISO-9001" mark on a product, product packaging or laboratory report.

Isn't there a rule against self-promotion?
This articles sounds an awful lot like self-promotion for the company that invented ISO 9000, and the only way I've ever even heard of it, whatever it is, is from a company selling it. Article should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.179.30.11 (talk) 15:29, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Some deletions
Some of the text seems a bit promotional; I've tried to rewrite some of the material that lacks solid citation and seems to be an opinion rather than a fact.

The text on the citation to "BSI Management Systems, BSI Case Study on the Benefits of ISO 9000 Registration: Accenture" (http://www.bsi-emea.com/Quality/CaseStudies/Accenture.pdf) referenced "increasing shareholder value", but I didn't see that in the citation. In any case, BSI is a company that is in the business of selling ISO certification, so this link to a website where they do their own case study of their own work seemed rather promotional in nature. Likewise, I also deleted the citation to their DFDS Transport case study, http://www.bsi-emea.com/Quality/CaseStudies/DFDSTransport.pdf ; this also seems mostly their saying how good their implementation of ISO was. Michael-Zero (talk) 05:16, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Criticisms of ISO 9000
I am an Quality Management staff, I definitely agree with this criticism, and I have seen lots of company corrupted by inefficiency of ISO.

But the problem is this section lacks credentials, because the comments are from people that lacks international recognization (people well known in quality and continual improvement).

How on earth you expect normal folks to trust this comments, especially comments from nobody, Tom, Dick and Harry.

I am not trying to insult anyone, but for 10 years, I myself unable to convince anyone regarding ISO incompetency. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Max32td (talk • contribs) 08:41, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Dilbert
I have to say, this cartoon tells me more about ISO 9000 than the whole WP article. Maproom (talk) 21:58, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

All about ISO 9001; nothing about 9000
There is no overview of the standard. The Wikipedia entry to the original work, BS 5750 merely redirects here. If nothing from the ISO 9000 standard can be cited because of copyright and IP reasons, this should be stated upfront. Instead we have just a meandering article about ISO 9001. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.205.0.2 (talk) 03:39, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Shameless POS
This is among the worst wikipedia articles. Just look at the stupid BSI graphic. What is the improvement?

It isn't even remotely mentioned that ISO 9000 is a BIG business for the companies that conduct the Audits.

The whole article reads like an ad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.156.30.164 (talk) 23:25, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

The link in reference 20 is incorrect — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.196.255.28 (talk) 18:00, 3 October 2013 (UTC)


 * The article definitely does read rather bit like an advertisement. The references saying how ISO is effective seem to be primarily written by organizations that sell ISO services.Michael-Zero (talk) 16:42, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Material Archived
A large file of the talk section of this page has been archived here: Talk:ISO 9000/Archive 1. (all the discussion dating before June 2013) Michael-Zero (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:45, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Acronym?
The acronym ISO apparently stands for the International Organization for Standardization. Why is the word order different in the acronym? What does 9000 stand for? Michael-Zero (talk) 16:42, 23 December 2013 (UTC) My name is James Lamprecht, I wrote the first book on ISO 9000 published in the US with Marcel Dekker back in 1992. I have written several books on ISO 9000 and yet the article does not cite me; not really a problem but that is the nature of so-called Internet "research" which tends to be superficial. At any rate, I would say that the article (overview of ISO 9000), is actually pretty good. As far as what ISO means, it is not related to the Internal Organization based in Geneva. The word ISO was meant to mean equal as in isobar or isometric for example; I realize that can be confusing. As for the number 9000, I believe it has no particular significance except that, back in 1986, the number was the next number available to the International Organization, so they simply used it. Many of the objections listed in the article (and many more), as well as the history of standards are covered in my book: Quality and Power in the Supply Chain:  What Industry Does for the Sake of Quality. Butterworts-Heinemann, 2000. Jim Lamprecht, retired ISO 9000 consultant and auditor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.148.12.89 (talk) 21:07, 14 November 2016 (UTC)