ISO 9001:2015 – Losing Your Drive

There’s a lot of conversations surrounding ISO 9001:2015, the latest revision of the guidelines for the quality system set in place in 1984. What’s the difference between the two?  At heart of it is the requirements that help make sure that the light bulb manufactured in India fits in the lamp assembled in Belgium.  In this capacity, businesses have applied the conformity requirements of the QMS, and not much else. The focus has been on standardization without the demand to the application of the QMS (Quality Management System).

The change now is on leadership and risk analysis to make sure your organization is top-tier and can sustain any rough patch or big gain your business experiences. Developing and expanding the depth of various processes, self-assessments, and learning how to make use of quality tools are part of the new changes.   These tools highlight topics, such as, Six Sigma, Lean, and risk assessment to name a few as new methods and opportunities required now because expectations are to go beyond the baseline we’ve been accustomed to.

Before you start building up, though, you have to look down. A strong foundation is needed before you can build up your enterprise.  Are you reviewing your performance and employing the Plan, Do, Act, and Study management review process. What exactly do you want done in terms of your vision and your company’s mission?  Does your management team and employees know what your mission and vision are?  These topics go beyond the Quality Policy and Quality Objectives.  Armed with this you can then create a strategic implementation plan to communicate to your employees and customers your vision and mission.

Follow this with a collaborative team approach to explore the potential value and expansion of your QMS. Don’t lose steam because you reach a milestone with your business now it is all about continuous improvement. There’s always room for improvement: aim to achieve more and expand your business to run as efficiently and profitably as possible.

Leave a Reply