© ISO Management Systems, www.iso.org/ims
VIEWPOINT
T
he launching of ISO 9000
stimulated a response
from the business world
that is unprecedented in the
history of standardization. For
the first time, an internationally
accepted set of quality requirements provided the basis for a
transparent mechanism of independent, “ third-party ” certification of quality management
systems that established the
credibility of a supplier company
and its ability to deliver products
to the customer’s satisfaction.
What was
Re-engineering
the
ISO 9001:2000
certification
process
originally meant
to be a service
to industry is
BY
L IEUTENANT-G ENERAL H. L AL
(R ETD .)
Once a certification body certifies a company, it expects to
have a customer for life, with
regular follow-on income in the
form of surveillance fees and
re-certification fees. This has
encouraged hundreds of companies to enter the certification
business, leading to intense competition. To be competitive, some
certification companies resort to
cutting costs by employing lowpaid and/or inadequately trained
auditors and reducing audit mandays. In some cases, the profit
motive has also led to various
types of unethical practice like
establishing informal links with
training and consultancy organizations.
Very few companies
increasingly
are refused
a business
certification and
motivated by
there is hardly
profit
any suspension
or cancellation
As a result, a prospective
customer company anywhere in
the world was spared the effort
and expense of its own evaluation before doing business with
such an organization. Now that
we have had over a decade of
experience of ISO 9000, let us
assess whether ISO 9000 certification has achieved its original
objective.
Judging by the views expressed
in various forums, one cannot
help but conclude that ISO 9000
certification has fallen short of
expectations. The main reason
for laxity and malpractice in ISO
9000 certification is that what was
originally meant to be a service
to industry is increasingly a business motivated by profit.
of ISO 9000
certificates
Lieutenant-General H. Lal
is Chairman of the Standards
Advisory Committee of the
Bureau of Indian Standards
(www.bis.org.in) and Director
General of the FICCI Quality
Forum of the Federation
of Indian Chambers of
Commerce and Industry.
E-mail hlal@ficci.com
Web www.ficci.com
There is an inherent conflict
of interest among the players in
the ISO 9000 certification business. On the one hand, the certification body is the examiner
of the audited company. On the
other hand, the audited company
is the customer who engages the
certification body to provide the
certification service for a fee.
In a highly competitive field,
it is unrealistic to expect that
auditors of the certification
body will be totally objective.
For a certification body, it is a
question of retaining or losing
long-term business. That is why
ISO Management Systems – May-June 2004
15
© ISO Management Systems, www.iso.org/ims
VIEWPOINT
very few companies are refused
certification and there is hardly
any suspension or cancellation of
ISO 9000 certificates. Thus one
of the root causes of certification
malpractice is the customer-supplier relationship between the
audited company and the certification body.
The certification
audit process
fails to provide
safeguards for
customers against
unsatisfactory
by certified
companies
Another weakness in the
present certification system is the
general tendency among auditors
to focus mainly on documentation and paper trail audits. Very
little effort is spent on checking
whether processes are actually
under control, or whether tangible improvements have been
made in product quality.
The reason for this focus on
the management system and not
the results it achieves is that most
auditors are generalists who have
merely completed a five-day lead
auditor course supposedly to
develop auditing skills. They do
not have adequate knowledge
about the products or processes
to carry out a technical audit.
Realizing the importance of
this issue, the new standard ISO
19011: 2002 requires the auditors
to have knowledge and skills
about processes and products,
including services, to enable
16
ISO Management Systems – May-June 2004
In this context, the following
model is suggested as one of the
possible solutions.
!
! !
!
!
New model
The basic threetier structure of
certification bodies,
accreditation bodies
and International
Accreditation Forum
(IAF) is sound
The basic three-tier structure
of certification bodies, accreditation bodies and International
Accreditation
Forum
(IAF
– www.iaf.nu) is sound. The
changes suggested below mainly
relate to the way accreditation
bodies and certification bodies
carry out their assessments and
interact with the applicant companies. The proposed modifications to the certification process
are intended to “ de-commercialize ” certification services. Salient
features of the new model are
given below :
!
!
!!!!
!
performance
the auditor to comprehend the
technological context in which
the audit is being conducted.
In actual practice, however,
many certification bodies do not
strictly follow these criteria when
assigning their auditors.
The ISO 9000:2000 series
clearly identifies the ultimate customer of products and services as
one of the primary stakeholders,
but the certification audit process does not address customer
concerns and fails to provide
safeguards for customers against
unsatisfactory performance by
certified companies.
Thus, there is a clear case for
reviewing the present mechanism
and processes of ISO 9000 certification – henceforth, ISO 9001:
2000 certification – so as to meet
its original objectives and make
it an efficient vehicle for facilitating global trade. This review
must address three main weaknesses of the present system :
1. The commercial nature of
the relationship between
the certifier and the audited
organization
2. The technical competence of
auditors.
3. Accountability of the certification body to final customers
and end users of the audited
company’s products or services.
Co-ordination by the accreditors
The first step in the proposed
model would be to set up one
accreditation body for each country and require all certification
bodies operating in that country
to seek accreditation from this
body. If a country were unable to
establish a national accreditation
body, it could utilize the services
of the accreditation body of a
neighbouring country.
Each accreditation body, in
consultation with the certification
bodies, would specify a standard
© ISO Management Systems, www.iso.org/ims
VIEWPOINT
fee structure for a three-year
certification and certification/
surveillance audits for various
types and sizes of organization,
based on the estimated man-days
of auditing required.
A company that wished to
achieve ISO 9001:2000 certification would be asked to apply
to the national accreditation
body, or in the absence of one,
the body serving that country.
This body would determine the
certification fee based on the
data furnished by the company,
which would be asked to remit
the certification audit fee and
sign a standard agreement for a
certification audit.
not fit for certification. Whether
the audited company obtains a
certificate or not, the certification body would be paid the
specified certification audit fee.
Accountability to customers
Whether the audited
company obtains
a certificate or not,
the certification
body would be
paid the specified
certification audit
fee
On receipt of the fees and
certification agreement, the
accreditation body would pass
on the application to one of its
accredited certification bodies
that had the requisite scope,
for the agreed certification fee.
The accreditation body should
develop a system for equitable
distribution of certification business to its certification bodies.
All further activities connected with certification would
be carried out by direct interaction between the certification
body and the applicant company,
either until the latter is awarded
the certificate, or is considered
check that processes are under
control by having some accepted
products re-tested and comparing the results with the original
inspection report to ensure the
integrity of documentation. The
certification audit should also
verify whether planned quality
objectives have been achieved.
Accreditation assessment
process
At present, assessors of
accreditation boards assess a
certification body by witnessing
one of its certification audits.
This enables certification bodies
to demonstrate a certification
audit of a top-level company
by its most competent auditors.
This is hardly a random sample
of the auditing being performed
by the certification body. It is like
offering a VIP sample for inspection. To correct this weakness,
the accreditation body’s team of
assessors should re-audit one of
the certification body’s clients,
selected at random. This audit
report would be a much better
indicator of the competence of
certification bodies.
Certification audit process
In addition to carrying out
an adequacy audit of the documented quality system, the certification body auditor should also
If a customer places an
order with a supplier on the
basis of the latter’s ISO 9001:
2000 certification, then in case
of unsatisfactory performance
by the supplier, the certification
body should not be allowed to
escape moral responsibility.
While it may not be possible
to hold the certification body
legally liable, a provision should
be made whereby an unsatisfied
customer could lodge a complaint with the certification body.
The latter should then be obliged
to investigate the complaint and
take up the matter with the supplier. Fear of losing certification
would thus motivate the supplier
to satisfy the customer. Such
a provision, if implemented
properly, would add tremendous
value to the certification system
for final customers and end
users.
These simple changes in the
certification process could transform certification audits into a
real differentiating mechanism
whereby only those companies
will be able to obtain and
maintain certification that have
effectively implemented ISO
9000 standards with demonstrable results. This would add tremendous value to the ultimate
customers whose faith alone can
sustain the certification business.
ISO Management Systems – May-June 2004
17