What is the value added by certification of an established QMS?
We are taught to have a positive attitude. In line with law of natural justice, let me put my neck out. Let’s still assume that there ‘is’ value associated with the certification of the established quality management system. Hitherto, for some, assuming that the entire world wide multi-million dollar industry of certification to be entirely based upon flawed premise, may seem too far a stretch of imagination. Isn’t it? And, have we not heard of terms such as value added auditing?
So, there is this ‘notion’ of ‘value added audit’ – the value added by the auditing as a process. What will this perceived ‘value’ depend upon? Again, as you may have already prophesied, it will not depend upon the certifying body origins, nor will it depend on the accrediting authority. It is largely, only a function of the auditor competence. Any sane person will argue that since auditors are selected, hired, recruited, trained, witnessed, approved and evaluated by the certification body, therefore the value added by the audit as well depends upon the certification body. But, overall, what is the importance ascribed to the auditor by the certification body?
I can narrate any number of real life incidences where-in the least amount of importance is assigned to the auditor by the certification body in the overall scheme of things. If the reader is in this field, he may have himself evidenced the incompetence of the auditor first hand. If the reader is not from related field, no amount of explanation will suffice to tell him what I mean. Still I can try to highlight some key trends.
KEY TRENDS
In the part of the world, where I come from, anything ‘German’ is associated with high quality. A certification body, with its parent organisation in Germany and obviously having a DAR accreditation, has been operating in here for long. Around half a dozen years back, in order to face the ever increasing competition, this CB decided to engage auditors on project to project basis. (For sake of understanding let’s put it this way – laid off chunk of the auditors – outsourced much of the auditing). Which direction do you think the value associated with certification went? In similar instances, I know of other high profile certification body, wherein majority of the auditors are ‘on panel’. Worst – with one of the premium CB’s most of their auditors have less than 5 years’ experience, as the CB could hardly afford experienced auditors.
Around a decade back, another of the – so considered – premium certification bodies came up with the notion of ‘Risk Based audit’. No doubt that it was a fine idea. However the auditor himself, that I happen to come across, could hardly make sense of risk. So he went about inquiring with every single auditee, including operatives, about the risk in the process! If the certification body really had control over the selection, hiring, recruiting, training, witnessing audit, approval and evaluation process, this audit based on Risk in the organisation’s context would have added tremendous value.
The process of audit not being able to add value is still a very small issue. Based on my experience of more than a decade in the field I can definitely tell you, that a randomly selected sample of organisations with around 5 years of being certified will have another story to tell. Forget about adding value, there are auditors who will make certification experience next to hell for the organisations’ employees by inserting their (auditor’s) own requirements. I can narrate a story of auditor inserting his own requirements with respect to any and every clause of the standard. But, it will be a futile exercise for the intelligent reader. However, let me just highlight the most recent example. Here the auditor asked for modification of the manual, procedures and entire documentation because the organisation had spelt it as Management Representative everywhere instead of Management Appointee, for IMS (ISO 9001 / ISO 14001 / OHSAS 18001) certification. Can you imagine the re-work the organisation had to go through? What was the value added by this?
It all gets further murkier when the auditor, seeks to help the organisation to improve their system by referring her / his consultant friend. Let me not further elaborate on this “I scratch your back, you scratch mine” tendency which is bound to open can of worms.
Another example, but this time, a positive one. Around six years back I came across this fine individual with a very highly reputed CB. I had the opportunity to see his audits from closed quarters. Easily these were the best audits I have ever come across and leaned a great deal from. Latter he joined a small upcoming certification body. However, he was very good as an auditor & so very influential with the top management of various organisations that he had audited. They all followed him to the small upcoming certification body for all their certification requirements! Again the point is, it all depends on the auditor competence to add value.
If it is all about the auditor’s competence where is the value of holding that coveted ‘prestigious’ document which says the organisation is certified by reputed independent third party certification body which in turn is accredited by world recognised accreditation board?
With this we are back to the original question that we started out with, “What is the value added by certification of an established QMS?”
FLAWED BUSINESS MODEL
With equal, if not more pain, I conclude that certification business as it stands today is a flawed business model.
I am very well aware that the reader is intelligent, and might be much more experienced in the field. I am not asking you to buy into my argument, but to just consider this as an honest evaluation. If you feel that I have erred, please let me know of your opinion, clarification and justification. I am open to reconsidering my position. In fact I will be glad to. There is no remorse in accepting the fact that some part of the butter on my bread, I owe to this industry!
A friend informs me of a recent quote from the man at the helm of ISO / TC 176 responsible for ISO 9001:2015 Dr. Nigel Croft:
“ISO 9001:2015 is not about getting a certificate but rather, about managing the business, providing confidence to companies that they are doing things right and in a systematic manner particularly in managing risks.”
References:
- Expected outcome of accredited certification:http://www.iso.org/iso/definitive_expected_outcomes_iso9001.pdf
- ISO – guidelines on Publicizing certification:http://www.iso.org/iso/publicizing_iso9001_iso14001_certification_2010.pdf
Bio:
With more than a decade of experience in the field of management systems, Arvind has seen quality management system implementation exercise from every angle. He has served at all designations from an Assistant to Management Representative, Internal Auditor, Junior Consultant, Consultant, Project Leader, Auditor, Lead Auditor and Trainer. In all this endeavours he has not lost focus of Value addition through Management Systems standards. He routinely app