Meaning of ISO 9001 Rating?

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

Texas Star said:

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.

Click to expand...

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).

jaykellogg said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

LVSteve said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

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?

bluegrassarms said:

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.

Click to expand...

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 rolleyes , 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...

finesse_r said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

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.

Taurus627 said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

blujax01 said:

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.

Click to expand...

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