Quality management system (QMS) registrations to ISO 9001/2:1994 standards will expire on (or before) December 15, 2003. Accordingly, all organizations currently registered to these standards will need to make the transition to ISO 9001:2000 standards before then. In fact, most organizations are being encouraged by their registrar to in conjunction with the date when their current ISO 9001/2:1994 registration expires. Yet over 80% of the organizations have not yet ‘upgraded’ their 1994 based registration to the new standards. Why are so many organizations waiting until the last minute to make the transition?

Bottom line? Top management of most organizations are inclined to believe that the new/revised requirements are not that big of a leap. In fairness to them, they are drawing that conclusion based on misinformation or a lack of understanding of the relative ‘maturity’ of their existing (1994 based) quality management system.

Most organizations have received some kind of training/guidance from a consultant or their registrar that has led them to believe that the new/revised requirements do not represent that big of a change. Oftentimes, this belief is based on a gap analysis performed by the registrar and implementation of a related transition plan that ‘looks’ and sounds very easy to implement. Just add in a couple new procedures (regarding customer satisfaction and continual improvement) … toss in a flow chart of two ‘depicting the sequence and interaction of your key business partners … and come up with a measurable objective or two … and you’re set! In a way, that ‘may’ pretty close to the truth … IF you implemented ISO 9001/2:1994 requirements as they were intended to be implemented. In fact, most of the new/revised requirements included in the new standards have to do with clarifying what was always intended by the old standards. For example:

Qualifying your suppliers is not a new requirement; however periodically re-evaluating them against specific criteria is a new requirement. The truth is most organizations grand fathered existing suppliers in and never really established a viable supplier evaluation/monitoring program, as was intended … they’ve got some work to do.

Likewise, identifying and providing training needed to ensure employee competency is not a new requirement. Evaluating training provided to ensure it was effective is a new requirement, although it was always intended (for obvious reasons). This may require some thought and a whole new way of determining and documenting employee qualifications and training.

Even though monitoring and measuring customer satisfaction is a whole new requirement, achieving customer satisfaction has always been a major aim of the standard. However, if an organization thinks managing customer complaints and returns (and other measures of dissatisfaction) will meet this requirement, they will be surprised to learn how much work they have left to do to get the ‘customer’s perception’ of how they’re doing and translating that input into ‘actionable’ data leading to improvement.

There are many more examples that could be offered like these. However, simply put, if you met the intent of the old standards, the transition to the new standards IS going to be a relatively small leap. However, if your organization adopted a ‘minimalistic’ approach to achieving conformance, then there is going to be a huge leap to becoming a performing and continually improving organization. Where do you stand? Have you really given yourself enough time to make the “Move from Conformance to Performance” in 2003?

IsoQual’s “Premium Implementation Package” contains ‘all you need’ to effectively and efficiently implement/transition to ISO 9001:2000. Good luck, as you make the “Move from Conformance to Performance” in 2003!