2011-12-06
ISO has just published an updated edition of the ISO 19011 auditing standard which will save money, time and resources by providing a uniform approach to multiple management system audits.
In today’s business environment, many organizations incorporate a number of management systems, such as quality, environmental, IT services and information security. As a result, these organizations want to harmonize and, where possible, combine the auditing of these systems.
Compared to the first edition of the standard published in 2002 which applied only to ISO 9001 (quality) and ISO 14001 (environment) ,the scope of ISO 19011:2011, Guidelines for auditing management systems, has been expanded to reflect current thinking and the complexities of auditing multiple management system standards (MSS).
It will help user organizations to optimize and facilitate the integration of their management systems and, in facilitating a single audit of its systems, will streamline the audit processes, reduce duplication of effort and decrease disruption of work units being audited.
Specific attention is given to the implementation of the audit programme. By fully applying these guidelines, the prerequisites are provided to make auditing a crucial tool for top management to achieve the objectives of the organization.
ISO 19011:2011 provides guidance on the conduct of internal or external management system audits, as well as on the management of audit programmes. Intended users of this International Standard include auditors, audit team leaders, audit programme managers, organizations implementing management systems, and organizations needing to conduct audits of management systems for contractual or regulatory reasons.
Alister Dalrymple, Convenor of the team that updated the guidelines, described the benefits which the new standard is expected to bring to users and the improvements made compared to the 2002 edition it replaces:
“ISO 19011:2011 has been revised to provide auditors, organizations implementing management systems and organizations needing to conduct audits of management systems an opportunity to re-assess their own practices and identify improvement opportunities.
"Compared to the 2002 version, the standard adds the concept of risk and recognizes more explicitly the competence of the audit team and individual auditors. Also, the use of technology in remote auditing is acknowledged, for example, conducting remote interviews and reviewing records remotely.”
Another improvement is the clarification of the relationship between ISO 19011:2011 and ISO/IEC 17021:2011, Conformity assessment – Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems. While those involved in management system certification audits follow the requirements of ISO/IEC 17021:2011, they might also find the guidance in this International Standard useful.
ISO 19011:2011, Guidelines for auditing management systems, was developed by ISO technical committee ISO/TC 176, Quality management and quality assurance, subcommittee SC 3, Supporting technologies. It is available from ISO national member institutes (see the complete list with contact details). It may also be obtained directly from the ISO Central Secretariat, price 142 Swiss francs, through the ISO Store or by contacting the Marketing, Communication & Information department.
Source: www.iso.org
Showing posts with label iso. Show all posts
Showing posts with label iso. Show all posts
Monday, March 5, 2012
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
10 CRITICAL FACTORS THAT MAKE ISO IMPLEMENTATION SUCCESSFUL
...
Based on PQA's research on why some companies had such great success with their ISO implementations and others failed spectacularly, PQA has identified 10 Critical Success Factors that make an ISO implementation successful. They are:
1. Sr. Management's recognition of their crucial role in the ISO system management process
2. ISO involvement at all levels, jobs, and areas in the organization
3. Understanding of the organizational processes and the critical control points in the process.
4. People trained in how to do their job, and interact effectively with the whole system.
5. Focusing on organizational development & improvement, not just the bare minimum (ie. what the ISO Registrar is willing to accept today)
6. Finding balance between excess ISO bureaucracy, and insufficient ISO system depth to ensure consistent results.
7. Dedication to following the agreed systems at all levels in the organization
8.Keeping the organization focused on meeting the ISO implementation timeline
9. Effective ISO auditing (ie. Sr. Management knows the ISO status, the risks, and gets actionable recommendations for rapid improvement)
10. Timely management response to ISO audit results.
If a consultant was relied upon to guide the ISO implementation, the fault for a poor ISO implementation may very well lie with the consultant. Was the consultant's advise understood, and followed by Sr. Management? Most Sr. Management get distracted very early in the ISO implementation process, then abdicate (Sr. Management calls it "delegate") the ISO implementation process to staff or consultants. The effective ISO implementation is often sacrificed for a quick ISO certificate on the wall with minimal effort and costs.
For quality consultants to be effective, they need to have a good understanding both of ISO 9001 and the sector or company they are seeking to apply it to. Effective ISO 9001 implementation is supposed to lead to improved productivity, efficiency, consistency and client service. If ISO 9001 is not delivering this, then it has not been effectively implemented.
...
http://www.pqa.net/ProdServices/ISO/ISO-System-Effectiveness.html
Based on PQA's research on why some companies had such great success with their ISO implementations and others failed spectacularly, PQA has identified 10 Critical Success Factors that make an ISO implementation successful. They are:
1. Sr. Management's recognition of their crucial role in the ISO system management process
2. ISO involvement at all levels, jobs, and areas in the organization
3. Understanding of the organizational processes and the critical control points in the process.
4. People trained in how to do their job, and interact effectively with the whole system.
5. Focusing on organizational development & improvement, not just the bare minimum (ie. what the ISO Registrar is willing to accept today)
6. Finding balance between excess ISO bureaucracy, and insufficient ISO system depth to ensure consistent results.
7. Dedication to following the agreed systems at all levels in the organization
8.Keeping the organization focused on meeting the ISO implementation timeline
9. Effective ISO auditing (ie. Sr. Management knows the ISO status, the risks, and gets actionable recommendations for rapid improvement)
10. Timely management response to ISO audit results.
If a consultant was relied upon to guide the ISO implementation, the fault for a poor ISO implementation may very well lie with the consultant. Was the consultant's advise understood, and followed by Sr. Management? Most Sr. Management get distracted very early in the ISO implementation process, then abdicate (Sr. Management calls it "delegate") the ISO implementation process to staff or consultants. The effective ISO implementation is often sacrificed for a quick ISO certificate on the wall with minimal effort and costs.
For quality consultants to be effective, they need to have a good understanding both of ISO 9001 and the sector or company they are seeking to apply it to. Effective ISO 9001 implementation is supposed to lead to improved productivity, efficiency, consistency and client service. If ISO 9001 is not delivering this, then it has not been effectively implemented.
...
http://www.pqa.net/ProdServices/ISO/ISO-System-Effectiveness.html
Friday, December 10, 2010
MAJOR REVISIONS TO INT'L STANDARD
Background
Eight years ago, the International Standards Organization (ISO) issued the 19011 standard for quality and environmental management system auditing. It combined the separate quality and environmental management system audit standards into one. Good step. Unfortunately, the pressure to do this was coming from the conformity assessment community (sometimes called registration or certification) and the big multinational firms. The first 19011 standard reflected this bias and the USA delegation voted “no.” It passed anyway. About three years later, the USA released a supplement to the international version, giving additional guidance on how to apply these principles to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and internal (first-party) audits. The ANSI version of 19011, with the supplement, was a market success and outsold the international version by a wide margin.
Shortly after the ANSI version came out, the international committee started its required review of the original 19011. ISO procedures require this every five years, although it is often stretched out longer. The choices are revise, reissue, or reject. It was pretty obvious that the 19011 needed revision. Unfortunately, the international committee was upset with the Americans for making the standard better, so we were ignored for several years. The work stalled until a couple years ago, when some fresh faces joined the group, and USA participation was once more welcomed.
In the mean time, the Conformity Assessment committee decided to take over audit standard development for third-party registration/certification. A new committee (17021) was assigned the task. So the 19011 standard revisions will now cover internal audits and supplier audits. Hurray!
Major Strengths
* The auditing standard now covers all management system auditing: quality, environment, safety, security, etc. This fits right in with the trend of organizations integrating their management approaches. The revision is coming closer to other audit standards, such as the yellow book (US Government Accountability Office – GAO) and the red book (Institute of Internal Auditors – IIA).
* As mentioned above, third-party conformity assessment (registration/certification) audits will have their own new standard: ISO 17021. Publication of the new 17021 will probably occur quite soon, as the people writing it have a common focus and the intended audience is smaller.
* For the first time, the concept of risk appears. This is the risk of performing a bad audit, having incorrect conclusions, and not the risks taken by the auditee. For several decades, the IIA has included the concept of audit risk under their banner called quality assurance. While the concept is only briefly discussed in this 19011 revision, it is a good start for a long journey.
* Guidance on training, competency and evaluation of auditors is greatly improved. Gone are the tables of degree requirements, years of service, audits observed or performed, etc. The discussion is quite rational on what competencies are desired, how to achieve them, and how to measure them. Specific examples for various management systems and business sectors are given in an informative annex. The thoroughness of this information will overwhelm many users who just want to get or maintain their registration certificate.
* Sampling strategy is presented in an informative annex. It covers both statistical and judgment sampling in a non-technical manner.
* Most of the “practical Help” information from the earlier USA additions was transferred to this revision. While the additional material makes the document nearly 70 pages long, it significantly increases the understanding. It should result in better internal and supplier audits.
Major Weakness
* The standard continues to use the term client without clear definition. To say that the audit client is the “organization or person requesting an audit” is unsatisfactory. A clarifying note says, “The audit client may be the auditee organization or any other organization which has the regulatory or contractual right to request an audit.” This makes it sound like the majority of internal or supplier audits are requested by the group about to get audited. My experience says it is just the opposite. We should remove this debris for conformity assessment days and be truthful. Either remove the term or define the client as the person(s) in charge of the audit program.
Next Steps
The international committee has recommended the revision as a Draft International Standard (DIS), meaning all of the heavy lifting is done and the proposal is ready for release to the user community for comment. Our USA delegation meets in November to prepare the USA vote on this advancement to DIS. Unfortunately, the committee team leaders feel the revisions are not ready for the DIS stage. They suggest this draft contains too many new concepts, which may not be accepted by the user community, without stating what might be objectionable. This puts us in a very weak position to affect change. The strengths identified above are needed in today’s world of economic uncertainty, advancing technologies, and ecosystem challenges. Promoting sound management system audits, as described in the draft 19011, will make the world a better place to live and work.
The international working group plans to meet in Guadalajara, Mexico, in early March 2010. Comments will be collected, discussed, and another draft prepared. Once it achieves the DIS (draft international standard) level, ISO rules require it be made available to the public for comment. (Available does not mean free, however.) I am optimistic that the new and improved standard will be released a year from now.
Source : http://auditguy.blogspot.com/2009_10_01_archive.html
Eight years ago, the International Standards Organization (ISO) issued the 19011 standard for quality and environmental management system auditing. It combined the separate quality and environmental management system audit standards into one. Good step. Unfortunately, the pressure to do this was coming from the conformity assessment community (sometimes called registration or certification) and the big multinational firms. The first 19011 standard reflected this bias and the USA delegation voted “no.” It passed anyway. About three years later, the USA released a supplement to the international version, giving additional guidance on how to apply these principles to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and internal (first-party) audits. The ANSI version of 19011, with the supplement, was a market success and outsold the international version by a wide margin.
Shortly after the ANSI version came out, the international committee started its required review of the original 19011. ISO procedures require this every five years, although it is often stretched out longer. The choices are revise, reissue, or reject. It was pretty obvious that the 19011 needed revision. Unfortunately, the international committee was upset with the Americans for making the standard better, so we were ignored for several years. The work stalled until a couple years ago, when some fresh faces joined the group, and USA participation was once more welcomed.
In the mean time, the Conformity Assessment committee decided to take over audit standard development for third-party registration/certification. A new committee (17021) was assigned the task. So the 19011 standard revisions will now cover internal audits and supplier audits. Hurray!
Major Strengths
* The auditing standard now covers all management system auditing: quality, environment, safety, security, etc. This fits right in with the trend of organizations integrating their management approaches. The revision is coming closer to other audit standards, such as the yellow book (US Government Accountability Office – GAO) and the red book (Institute of Internal Auditors – IIA).
* As mentioned above, third-party conformity assessment (registration/certification) audits will have their own new standard: ISO 17021. Publication of the new 17021 will probably occur quite soon, as the people writing it have a common focus and the intended audience is smaller.
* For the first time, the concept of risk appears. This is the risk of performing a bad audit, having incorrect conclusions, and not the risks taken by the auditee. For several decades, the IIA has included the concept of audit risk under their banner called quality assurance. While the concept is only briefly discussed in this 19011 revision, it is a good start for a long journey.
* Guidance on training, competency and evaluation of auditors is greatly improved. Gone are the tables of degree requirements, years of service, audits observed or performed, etc. The discussion is quite rational on what competencies are desired, how to achieve them, and how to measure them. Specific examples for various management systems and business sectors are given in an informative annex. The thoroughness of this information will overwhelm many users who just want to get or maintain their registration certificate.
* Sampling strategy is presented in an informative annex. It covers both statistical and judgment sampling in a non-technical manner.
* Most of the “practical Help” information from the earlier USA additions was transferred to this revision. While the additional material makes the document nearly 70 pages long, it significantly increases the understanding. It should result in better internal and supplier audits.
Major Weakness
* The standard continues to use the term client without clear definition. To say that the audit client is the “organization or person requesting an audit” is unsatisfactory. A clarifying note says, “The audit client may be the auditee organization or any other organization which has the regulatory or contractual right to request an audit.” This makes it sound like the majority of internal or supplier audits are requested by the group about to get audited. My experience says it is just the opposite. We should remove this debris for conformity assessment days and be truthful. Either remove the term or define the client as the person(s) in charge of the audit program.
Next Steps
The international committee has recommended the revision as a Draft International Standard (DIS), meaning all of the heavy lifting is done and the proposal is ready for release to the user community for comment. Our USA delegation meets in November to prepare the USA vote on this advancement to DIS. Unfortunately, the committee team leaders feel the revisions are not ready for the DIS stage. They suggest this draft contains too many new concepts, which may not be accepted by the user community, without stating what might be objectionable. This puts us in a very weak position to affect change. The strengths identified above are needed in today’s world of economic uncertainty, advancing technologies, and ecosystem challenges. Promoting sound management system audits, as described in the draft 19011, will make the world a better place to live and work.
The international working group plans to meet in Guadalajara, Mexico, in early March 2010. Comments will be collected, discussed, and another draft prepared. Once it achieves the DIS (draft international standard) level, ISO rules require it be made available to the public for comment. (Available does not mean free, however.) I am optimistic that the new and improved standard will be released a year from now.
Source : http://auditguy.blogspot.com/2009_10_01_archive.html
Friday, January 22, 2010
AKREDITASI WQA OLEH KAN
Kabar menggembirakan dalam membuka lembaran tahun baru 2010 bagi karyawan Iska Niaga Darma group selain penempatan kantor baru di bilangan Jalan Pramuka, Jakarta oleh seluruh divisi dan unit usaha adalah diperolehnya sertifikat akreditasi oleh WQA dari KAN (Komite Akreditasi Nasional) sebagai pengakuan kesesuaian atas Standar SNI ISO/IEC 17021:2008 pada 30 Desember 2009.
Sebagaimana kita pahami bahwa penerapan standar internasional adalah suatu keniscayaan yang mesti kita lakukan di lingkungan Iska Niaga Darma group ini, pengakuan dari KAN ini tentunya sangat menggembirakan kita semua bahwa dalam proses bisnisnya WQA telah memenuhi persyaratan sesuai standar internasional, yang dalam versi aslinya adalah ISO/IEC 17021:2006 Conformity assessment – Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management system, setelah melalui serangkaian proses audit sebelumnya.
Dalam ucapan selamatnya, Pak Iskandar menyampaikan rasa syukurnya atas lembaran tahun baru yang dibuka dengan prestasi tersebut.
“Alhamdulillahirabbil ‘aalamin. Suatu awal yang baik dalam memasuki Tahun Baru. Selamat dan sukses untuk Pak Novian dan Tim WQA. Semoga ke depan lebih baik dan lebih baik lagi. Amiiin ...”
Mungkin saja ada di antara kita yang kaget, “lho, lembaga sertifikasi kok diaudit dan disertifikasi ... jeruk kok makan jeruk?” Jawabannya adalah : “ya”. Audit adalah salah satu cara bahwa hal-hal yang menjadi “persyaratan” telah dipenuhi serta langkah-langkah improvement adalah bagian dari sasaran yang harus senantiasa tercermin dalam kinerjanya.
Semoga hal ini menginspirasi kita semua dan kita tidak lagi terkaget-kaget manakala perdagangan bebas dunia tiba-tiba sudah berada di depan pintu rumah kita di mana setiap kompetensi mengharuskan kita memakai standar internasional.
Selamat buat Tim WQA!
Semoga prestasi ini menjadi modal semangat di masa-masa mendatang.
(JS)
Sebagaimana kita pahami bahwa penerapan standar internasional adalah suatu keniscayaan yang mesti kita lakukan di lingkungan Iska Niaga Darma group ini, pengakuan dari KAN ini tentunya sangat menggembirakan kita semua bahwa dalam proses bisnisnya WQA telah memenuhi persyaratan sesuai standar internasional, yang dalam versi aslinya adalah ISO/IEC 17021:2006 Conformity assessment – Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management system, setelah melalui serangkaian proses audit sebelumnya.
Dalam ucapan selamatnya, Pak Iskandar menyampaikan rasa syukurnya atas lembaran tahun baru yang dibuka dengan prestasi tersebut.
“Alhamdulillahirabbil ‘aalamin. Suatu awal yang baik dalam memasuki Tahun Baru. Selamat dan sukses untuk Pak Novian dan Tim WQA. Semoga ke depan lebih baik dan lebih baik lagi. Amiiin ...”
Mungkin saja ada di antara kita yang kaget, “lho, lembaga sertifikasi kok diaudit dan disertifikasi ... jeruk kok makan jeruk?” Jawabannya adalah : “ya”. Audit adalah salah satu cara bahwa hal-hal yang menjadi “persyaratan” telah dipenuhi serta langkah-langkah improvement adalah bagian dari sasaran yang harus senantiasa tercermin dalam kinerjanya.
Semoga hal ini menginspirasi kita semua dan kita tidak lagi terkaget-kaget manakala perdagangan bebas dunia tiba-tiba sudah berada di depan pintu rumah kita di mana setiap kompetensi mengharuskan kita memakai standar internasional.
Selamat buat Tim WQA!
Semoga prestasi ini menjadi modal semangat di masa-masa mendatang.
(JS)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
