We all have our opinion of Taurus guns, some not too enthusiastic.

I've read that the company has an ISO 9001 (?) rating, which supposedly means that they have high manufacturing standards that should give a buyer confidence.

Do any of you with backgrounds in industry know what this rating actually means, in layman's terms? Is it largely symbolic, or does it infer really substantial standards?

Just wondering.

Thanks.

When I worked for GE Appliance Control in Carroll, IA we became ISO 9001 compliant. This rating means you have high quality standards and that you adhere to them. This does not necessarily mean the customers are happy with the product, it just means that standards are in place to reduce the variation between products.

__________________
Luke 22:36

Yeah, but who enforces it? Who awards it?

If I remember correctly, we (GE) selected Underwriter's Laboratories to do our certification. You have to be recertified periodically which involves an extensive audit.

__________________
Luke 22:36

The International Standards Organization awards the certification. They also set information technology and photographic film standards, among others.

Here, this article might help - or put you to sleep.

ISO 9000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

__________________
Audaces Fortuna Juvat

It's definitely put-you-to-sleep material. The standard covers certain aspects of doing business which must be addressed. How you address them can be a function of the level of detail and sophistication of your own organization - and what the agency that actually certifies you (the "registrar") will put up with.

The standard does not concern itself with "high manufacturing standards" per se, at least as most people think of that. In other words, it is not there to specify design, materials, tolerances, etc. It is interested in seeing that you conduct your business in a certain, uniform way and that you are doing what you say you are doing in your quality system and procedures.

There are those who feel the "ISO-certification racket" is a nice little scheme that has made a lot of people a pretty chunk of change and not really added a lot of value to the product, but everyone's opinion on this varies to one degree or another and, like everything in life, the standard was never designed to be a cure-all. It has good points and bad points. Most companies tend to believe the good (increased sales possibilities) outweigh the bad (non-productive expense).

You want my honest opinion?

It's a set of standards on how a company should be run written by a bunch of bureaucrats who have never run a company but think filling out a bunch of forms and writing down a bunch of buzz words somehow assures you are doing a good job at it. I told that to the guy in charge of ISO certification for a company once who was blathering about how great he was. If looks could kill.

ISO is a Switzerland based non-governmental organization, NGO, made up of "members" which are in fact just other standards bodies within 150+ nations. The US member is ANSI. All these members vote and run the place, which is great if we're designing file formats and such and publishing them as "standards" so people can be compatible.

Where it fails is when they publish standards for something as intangible and subjective as best business practices. As a guideline ISO 9001 is fine, but so are any number of basic outlines published by myriad academics.

where it hits the fan is if you are committed to quality or not, and no amount of paperwork and certification and words can make it so.

It ends up being like a college degree. There are brilliant lawyers and horrid lawyers both with the same degree from the same school hanging on their wall. All it proves is they did the work to get the paper, it tells you nothing about how much they really understood it and how they can apply it in practice to help you. Likewise ISO 9001 can tell you they filled out the paperwork and paid the fees and got the certification, but it can't really tell you if they company is well run and managed and committed to quality any more than a law degree tells you a person is a great or bad lawyer.

Like school, you can go through the process and get a lot out of it or come out with the same degree having skated by and learned nothing. No amount of paperwork will stop bad management decisions or make people care about quality who don't in their souls worry about quality.

It's an admirable goal, but in the end Taurus will either turn out quality guns or they won't, and the market will make that determination, not a group of people who by and large have never turned a lathe or fired a gun.

Having or not having ISO "certification" IMO tells you nothing about the company of use when making a purchase decision. It tells me they are probably contracting with someone who requires it, which is the "racket" part referred to in M29's excellent post.

__________________
Chuck M

It's a quality standard, I deal with AS9100, the Aerospace version every day.

A certification means that you can produce a product the same way, time after time, but that product doesn't necessarily have to work.

The joke is that you could build cement life jackets that would meet the ISO requirements.

it almost don't matter.
if the product is a poor design in terms of engineering ISO 9001 means you won't get lucky and find a specimen whose run out stacks in your favor

__________________
it just needs more voltage

In a nutshell, it is just a certification that you have documented procedures and actually follow them. It makes no judgement on the quality of the procedures, product design, manufacturing techniques, or anything else. The individual company generates the procedures, they are then certified that the procedures are followed. The company must have documentation proving that they followed procedure.

Personally, I am a skeptic. As bluegrassarms said, you end up with a bureaucrats who have no responsibility to produce anything dictating to those who do. You end up in perpetual "cover your rear" mode - providing evidence that procedures were followed becomes more important than actually designing and producing the product.

I think they way it got started was this group went to customers (government at first) and told them "You aren't getting a quality product unless your vendors are certified to this standard".

Then they went to the vendors and said "You won't win contracts unless you are certified to this standard".

Sort of like an arms dealer instigating a war and then selling weapons to both sides.

__________________
Common sense isn't so common.

It means that either:
1. Your product is either consistently good,
2. Your product is either consistently average, or
3. Your product is either consistently bad.

It basically means you shoot a very tight pattern that may or may not actually hit the target.

I was a Process operator for a MAJOR oil/chemial plant. We went through the certification and it was the general consensus that another name for it might me the country version of the term cow manure.

All the significance of the commotion, hassle, extra work and babysitting of shoe-clerks in our manufacturing spaces who had NO CLUE (no offense to any shoe sales folks in here )never made it down to the sweaty masses down in the trenches where I worked.

As far as I know the company didn't sell an extra dollars worth of product for all the nonsense. This whole thing was customer driven. They more or less demanded we go through it in the interest of our continued business relationship.

But my employer took it very seriously. We were all invited to be on our best behavior and kiss up to those twerps as much as we could. The entire thing is a perfect example of how one or a very few big shots can put massive amounts of people through the hoop for no purpose other than to swell up and exercise their power.

If you can't tell I'm holding back. I don't dare say how I REALLY feel about it..............

__________________
Real men love cats!

I worked at a company that was ISO-9001 certified. another one of the reasons was if you have manufacturing plants overseas it had to be ISO-9001 certified as well to be able sell your product in Europe.

ISO certifications rarely look at the finished product. It's all about processes. Are your suppliers ISO certified? do you quality check you raw materials? Do you quality check after each manufacturing step? Is it documented somewhere? Can i trace this particular end product to the person who tested in at the factory? during the machining process? when the raw materials were delivered? it's all about processes which should lead to a quality product.

__________________
Semper Fi

Most suppliers to the auto industry are ISO or QS certified, if for no other reason the Detroit three said failure to be so by 2000 would be cause for removal from bid lists. My employer at the time spent about $400,000 to hit that mark (in addition to the 80 or 90k a year to keep it). All was well for a short time until the powers that be in Detroit, discovered there where good number of non QS/ISO business' out there with a built in cost savings..... They did not pay to become or stay QS/ISO certified.

__________________
always trust your cape...

the first paragraph is exactly what it is at the company i work for. procedures are documented with photographs and written explanations and are kept in a book for all to see.

ISO 9001 is a lot like the BBB. It means nothing unless you want to have a chance in getting certain contracts. I have been through the ISO 9001 and the ISO 14001 and it is a joke.

Was the Yugo company ISO 9001 certified? I hope the manager took the certification home before the smart bombs started hitting.

__________________
NRA LIFE MEMBER

The Blue collar version is this- You make a product, any product, the same way EVERY time. It doesn't matter if the product is good or flawed as long as it is made the same way EVERY time. It is all about making a statement that says "we build our product the same whether it is serial number 1 or 1 million." CONSISTANCY is the key word for ISO. The previous poster was correct in that you have to have this certification to market your product overseas. This was explained to me when I had to go through the training.

Thanks, guys! I think you've all given me a pretty clear picture of the issue.

About what I'd suspected...

Taurus aside, is the Argentine (not Brazilian) arsenal at Rosario 9001 certified? The Itajuba arsenal in Brasil/Brazil? Their guns have a pretty good rep, most from Itajuba sold here being imported and/or refined by Springfield Armory.

Three gun writers in particular have extolled Taurus quality, but most posts about their guns are controversial, at best. One of these guys appears to have done paid promotional writing for that and other companies. That leaves one wondering about his "reviews."

Bear in mind that all three may have been reporting honestly about the Taurus guns that they have individually used. Personally, if I'm buying a new revolver, it's likely to be a Ruger. (I do like older S&W's, so joined this board.) I suspect that most US arms makers have the 9001 certification and just don't brag about it. The ultimate consideration seems to be the maker''s general reputation and what you can see of a gun in a store before buying. Beyond that, only the warranty and the maker's rep protect you, not a 9001 cert.

This is not a grudge post about Taurus. I've never owned one. They are just the only gun company to my knowledge who have mentioned that cert., and I wondered what it actually means, in terms of consumer confidence.

I have been involved with implementing these standards for a major international company for a number of years.

Unfortunately, the ratings apply more to how effectively (or creatively) a company can write up their processes than actually performing them.

Yes, a business has to have some level of quality control and process to get into the game... However, in my opinion it is not an effective yardstick in predicting what kind of product you can always expect.

ISO 9001 usually means that the bosses of your company (who do NOT actually understand what it means) will have you all running around doing lots of unnecessary paperwork that is NOT required to meet the standard. You may guess how I know.

When done PROPERLY, ISO 9001 gives you traceability for how you do things, be it build widgets or provide a service. If it ever comes to a dispute and you can show you are operating as per your procedures in 9001 certification, the complainant is generally up the smelly creek without his paddle. Yes, it has an element of CYA, but given how complex many industries are, it can save a lot of time in disputes. Again, the key part is if done PROPERLY.

I too have done setup and maintenance of ISO 9001 certification. I like to use the bakery analogy to illustrate what happens most times. There's a bakery that bakes really bad tasting bread. They decide that they are going to become ISO 9001 certified. They write up all of their processes. Install checks and audits to assure that the processes are followed to the letter. Hire auditors and clerks to monitor their progress. The certifying company came in and was very impressed! They immediately certified the bakery ISO 9001 compliant. But, guess what, they still made really bad bread. But they made it exactly the same each time. ISO Certification is only a measure of the quality system that's in place, not the quality of the product itself.

Sent from my MB865 using Tapatalk

I wouldn't take it as meaning anything either way that they mention it and others don't. I wouldn't put any ISO certified company ahead of another simply b/c they went through the process, but I don't hold it against them either b/c so many are basically forced to b/c they contract with bigger companies or governments who require it.

I imagine Taurus touts it b/c it's a bigger thing abroad than in the US, and may be big in Brazil (speculation on my part). It doesn't tell us anything about their quality versus a Ruger or S&W either way.

Personally other than to satisfy big clients who are requiring it I have no idea why you'd pay through the nose for that certification. If I were running S&W or Ruger I'd probably fire the first person to suggest it, and maybe myself if I weren't able to correct it as a manager. If I'm not turning out consistent quality product there are simply easier, cheaper, quicker ways to address the issue than to pay ISO to come "certify" my process. JMHO.

Re Taurus specifically I have a solid opinion overall but I have little personal experience with them. I'm sure they have their duds but i've talked to several who own a Taurus of one kind or another and are reasonably happy with it. I've shot probably half a dozen with no issues, sold a few dozen here and there and everyone was satisfied with it afaik (and no doubt I'd have heard if it was a problem gun).

__________________
Chuck M

Right.

The reality is that if you are ISO 9001 certified, that means you have the MINIMUM documentation, procedures, quality tests, etc. to meet the standard.

That does not mean that you have the BEST in the industry, because the ISO standard requires you, as a manufacturer, to state what you will do to meet the standard, and then rate yourself against what you say you're doing.

It does NOT mean you are the best at anything. Heck, I've worked for companies that adhere to the ISO/TS 16949 automotive standard (old QS-9000) for most of my career, and these are builds upon and even more stringent than base 9001. Everywhere I've been, we still have quality complaints.

So in the end, it just means that you have a 3rd party inspector come in on some periodic basis (every 6 months, once per year) to validate that you are doing what you say you're going to do to meet the standard.

And yes, I spent several years in direct operations quality management. I ran away screaming.

lol. For all my comments on ISO probably the biggest problem is top management who are insisting on getting certified but don't really understand the process, the goals, and often not even how their company operates on a day to day basis.

I was in consulting for a while so I can say this, but the biggest problem with ISO is that like every other "outside" solution it's often (not always) an attempt by managers to patch a problem with an easy fix versus addressing the fundamental shortcomings and issues, usually b/c they are in fact the shortcoming in question.

__________________
Chuck M

Another thought for you....automotive companies all require themselves and their suppliers to be ISO/TS 16949 certified (again, a build upon base 9001). Yet, you hear about problems all the time with lemons, recalls, etc.

Does that help your thought process here?

Maybe YOU don't understand THEM? (just kidding )

Management (generally) doesn't really care about the niceties of systems and procedures. That stuff is for the little people. Cost of quality is a percentage and unless it gets too big...

Actually, in some ways it's humorous that ISO-9000 tries to integrate "management" into their doctrine to such an extent when they understand that as well as anyone.

Nevertheless, the ISO-certification racket has been sold so effectively in this country that the biggies all know they are at a huge commercial disadvantage without it. From their point of view, it is a "must have" and they couldn't care less about details - or the opinions of the foot soldiers who actually know and do the job. "Just give it to me! We've got to have it! Our competition has it! Our customers say they will only do business with other ISO-certified companies!" (etc., etc.)

With that mentality in place, the bigshots install ISO-enablers in their organzations who, in many cases, are just clever enough to engineer their positions into fifedoms of considerable power and (imagined) importance - on the theory that the bigger and more powerful they are the harder it will be to eliminate their positions.

Thus the "racket" comment. ISO has cleverly - and successfully - made itself a huge, exclusive, self-perpetuating "club" that will probably stay in place until the next hussar's trick comes along and replaces it. The funny thing is, almost everyone knows better. Some time ago, with little to no value-add to show and concern that the emperor's clothes might no longer be visible (i.e., increasing costs were getting some attention), the ISO people quickly trumped up the silly notion that their little scheme actually "pays for itself" and began pushing that line heavily. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to reckon the truth of that one.

All in all, it's probably safe to say most of us feel the ISO-cert gig is overwhelmingly a waste of resources, and what little good it does a business should have already been handled in-house by any competent manager, but because of the pervasive demand for it by people who write the contracts and orders and sign the checks, most companies have to toe the line, put up with it, and, since we're spending money on it () , try to make the best of it.

Most all of my customers are ISO 9000 or TS 16949 certified, many are now being forced into the 14000 "green" certification.

You cannot be a tier 1,2 or 3 automotive supplier with out TS certs...

The funny thing was when I was in China even in the middle of no where every little shop had a ISO 9000 certified sign on it. So I take great pleasure knowing that Wongs shoe repair obtained certification!

Someone pointed out to me that it matters who does the certification. Some are much more strict than others...

This is a good summation. Everyone has covered this pretty well, but I feel the need to put in my $.02.

I worked at Motorola back in the 90's. FoMoCo was one of our biggest clients (the fab I was working, not necessarily Motorola overall), and they had been pestering us for quite some time to get certified, but Motorola kept insisting that their own QA program was working just fine. Since Ford had not had any issues with the product we were delivering, Motorola was loathe to go through the certification process. Eventually, Ford insisted...because they couldn't claim they were an ISO-certified company unless all of their suppliers were certified as well, and apparently Motorola was the last holdout.

I was on the team that instituted the changes and performed all of the pre-certification audits for our QS9000 certification (I never heard the terms "ISO-9000" or "-9001" until later. At Motorola, all I heard was QS9000). We were the first Motorola fab to be so certified. After we were certified, I went over to another fab to help with their certification. After they were certified, I was one of 3 people that were selected to be on the permanent quality team that was to replace our existing QA department. Unfortunately, the "Tech Bubble" picked that moment to burst, and in a fit of cost-cutting the whole "new" quality team was scrapped, and I was sent back to my previous job on the floor of the fab.

I remember our mantra during the run-up to certification was:

1) Say what we do (document your process)
2) Do what we say (follow your documented procedures)
3) Say what we did (document what you did)

The outside expert who was hired to guide us through this was always repeating this mantra. However, through this whole thing, our process was virtually unchanged. It was mostly about documentation.

Tim

My, this is entertaining. Too entertaining to put out the answer, yet.

Keep 'em coming!

Sincerely, blujax

(aka ~ Alan Slocum, Lead Field Specialist Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. -
Soon to be retired after 32 years of service ...

You've had a lot of good answers here and some opinions I agree with and some that I don't. ISO stands for International Standards Organistion. After WWII everything in the world was being built to the USA's military standards (MIL-STD). There were a lot of mil stds and mil specs. ISO is/was an attempt to have an international version. There are many different "ISOs" out there depending on the industry; manufacturing, electrical, plumbing, etc. I even saw a golf course in Thailand that said they were ISO certified!

It does spell out a list of standard attributes for a quality system. It is awarded and re-certified by third party (not related to the company or the customer (in my case the Dept of Defense)).

It is a quality system; it describes the company's quality organization, but unless that internal QA org is strong and autonomous no ISO certification will help. And as stated, an ISO cert will not necessarily produce quality product. It is only as strong as the company's sincere committment to quality. NOT having ISO certification probably is a better indicator than having it. It is hard and expensive to get and maintain but if a company is too lazy to get it they are probably lazy everywhere.

In 30+ years of buying product from companies around the world for DoD; I have found that the quality come from the people on the production floor.

Wow, all this negativity over ISO?? Having worked under ISO certification of the last 10 years, I think it's a good thing. I don't know where you all get the "consistently bad" thing but in my line of work, if the product isn't good, you don't stay in business, period!

I work for a company that manufactures printed circuit boards for a batch of different companies including the medical field. As some of you probably know, when it comes to medical electronic products, if they fail at the wrong time, someone dies. ISO has a set of standards we must adhere to to remain certified and if we loose that, we are done as a company. So you all can trash talk ISO all you want but next time you or someone you love is sitting on an operating table with a batch of monitors hooked up, thank ISO for if not for their set standards, without them that oxygen monitor might just fail at the wrong time.

__________________
NRA Life member

I'll remember that the next time I strap a pilot into an F-15. But seriously, is it ISO that makes your product good, or is the teh discipline and dedication of the workforce and quality organization? A system can't make the product great, the people do.

ISO 9000 Series of Quality Directives are built on the post-WWII British Standards Institute's BSI 900 Series of Quality Directives. (As an aside, QS9000 is particular to the automotive industry. They took ISO and added it to the Q1 program, initiated by FoMoCo years ago and also requires that the manufacturers turn over their accounting books, a requirement universally hated and fought by the industry. TS 9000 is for telecommunications where the FCC has added their own particular rings of Hell to the basic core.)

After the European Union was formed, they declared that any product imported into any of the member nations was required to be certified to these standards. As most European manufacturers already had this certification (much like complying with OSHA here) the edict was viewed by the USA as a tactic to limit exports to Europe. (Note: After all the American companies jumped through these hoops and obtained their ISO Certs., the EU then said "oh yeah, now you have to get the CE Mark - a discussion for another day...)

Basically, ISO Standards are a means of documenting processes and there are some basic requirements that must be included, including documenting incoming materials, testing, packaging and storage, transport and customer feedback. The intent is to ensure a consistent process. It has been said that you could manufacture concrete life vests with child labor and obtain your Certificate. That is an absurd, but correct, statement.

Successful implementation hinges on buy-in from the top down. No shortcuts, no going around the system in order to make short term gains. Live the system, trust the system, hone the system. I saw this process improve companies vastly,and I also saw companies who put up paper tigers to fool the auditors and learn nothing from the experience. It is not an inexpensive proposition.

Does ISO 9000 mean the product is a better one? No, but if the last one you bought was good, odds are the next one will be. Conversely, if the last one was a piece of junk, you can bet that the next one will be consistently disappointing...

I'm certain that I left out a lot of pertinent information but it's only 6 AM and I need more coffee...

My experience dealing with a manufacturer with ISO 9001 certification - which I believe have since been dropped due to the overall cost-to-benefit ratio.

Due to the documentation step by step process requirements if a product made it to a certain point in the process and a change needed to be made to a part that was early in the process - they were required to remain ISO 9001 compliant - to reverse through the assembly process back to the step where that part was installed - make the change - and then run through the process again back to completion - even in cases where there would be no reason whatsoever from a technical or logical perspective why the part could not be swapped at any time.

Dealing with the FDA is even worse - had a customer who got a system build approved by the FDA and then discovered there was an extraneous cable included in the initial build that server no purpose whatsoever and where the OEM fixed the bug that caused the cable to be added to the build submitted for certification. Well, in order to remove the unneeded cable from each order would have required a full recertification by the FDA - at considerable time and cost to the customer - so easier for them to have us add a $20 cable to each build that would be left on a shelf or tossed in the trash (or actually, they likely had to keep the unneeded part on hand in case of an audit).

In both cases - the process became more important than what the process was intended to ensure. Sounds like a lot of things really.

Thanks for this info. When I moved from Motorola to Intel, and everyone was talking about ISO-9001, and I mentioned QS9000...I was greeted by a bunch of blank stares. Now I know why.

Tim

i remember when all this stuff started,lots o BS and money involved in getting a certification and the one thing that i really got a good laugh out of was the fact the the people in Switzerland that dreamed all this up failed their first audit