At 18:41 24-7-00 -0700, you wrote:
>The people who have responded so far do not fully understand the ISO
I think I understood all right.
> ISO 9001 is a Quality System only. It has no direct tie to money making or
>profit. It is a uniform set of guidelines for an effective quality system.
>9001 is for manufacturing. 9002 is for independent testing laboratories.
>There are accredited registrars and surveillance auditors who audit a
>company's quality system to ensure that they are in compliance with the 20
>elements of the ISO Standard. ( A complete audit of a Quality System
>typically takes a couple of auditors 3 days or so.) The three basic
>principles of an ISO accredited system are 1 - Say what you do (have a
>Quality Policy Manual and a Quality Procedure Manual). 2 - Do what you say
>(Follow the Procedures and Policies), and 3 - Prove it (this means
>documentation, training records, etc.)
Like I said in an earlier posting:
>>Does this certificate really help? I think its yet another way for no-goods
>>to make money. These certificates do cost a lot of money, and do not really
>>add anything to an organisation IMHO.
> To say that having an ISO 9001 system in place does not guarantee a
>quality product out the door is true. However, NOT having an ISO system is
>certainly not a guarantee of quality. What ISO does is provides a set of
>guidelines to be followed for the operation of an effective Quality System,
>it is up to the individual company to manufacture a quality product.
I think a factory that produces crap will kill itself, no need for another
piece of (expensive) bureaucracy there..
Do you really think it will add anything to the BMW factories for example
to have an ISO certificate?