Iso 9000
The case against ISO 9000 by John Seddon
BS 5750 was one of the national standards from which the ISO 9000 series was developed, despite there being no evidence that it had merit. Everything I have learned suggests to me that this has been a mistake of monumental proportions. Rather than improving the quality and competitive position of organizations, ISO 9000 has made matters worse. I have found that its underlying thinking has little or nothing to do with quality and its implementation has prevented managers from seeing what might have been seen if they had taken a different – and genuine – quality view. ISO 9000 is claimed to be a quality management standard, certification to it being a formal recognition that an organization is managed in a quality manner. When I first came across the standard in the mid-1980’s, I was persuaded that the obvious overbureaucratization was due to managers taking an inappropriately internal and administrative attitude. At that time, I was dissuaded from being too critical. Criticism would have implied that I was not a supporter of the quality movement. Through the 1980’s and into the 1990’s, the bandwagon rolled on. Marketplace obligation, driven largely by government organizations and, latterly, the larger commercial organizations, meant an everincreasing number of certifications. ISO 9000 became ubiquitous and its status as a requirement for doing business lessened the chances of anyone questioning whether it was doing any good.
In brief
Not everyone is happy with the widespread implementation of ISO 9000. In the United Kingdom, one of the standard’s strongest critics is John Seddon, Managing Director of Vanguard Consulting1), who has written the book, In Pursuit of Quality: The Case Against ISO 9000. In the following article, Mr. Seddon summarizes his arguments against ISO 9000 which he castigates for what he sees as its “command and control” orientation. This, he says, is in direct contrast to the flexible,
BS 5750 was one of the national standards from which the ISO 9000 series was developed, despite there being no evidence that it had merit. Everything I have learned suggests to me that this has been a mistake of monumental proportions. Rather than improving the quality and competitive position of organizations, ISO 9000 has made matters worse. I have found that its underlying thinking has little or nothing to do with quality and its implementation has prevented managers from seeing what might have been seen if they had taken a different – and genuine – quality view. ISO 9000 is claimed to be a quality management standard, certification to it being a formal recognition that an organization is managed in a quality manner. When I first came across the standard in the mid-1980’s, I was persuaded that the obvious overbureaucratization was due to managers taking an inappropriately internal and administrative attitude. At that time, I was dissuaded from being too critical. Criticism would have implied that I was not a supporter of the quality movement. Through the 1980’s and into the 1990’s, the bandwagon rolled on. Marketplace obligation, driven largely by government organizations and, latterly, the larger commercial organizations, meant an everincreasing number of certifications. ISO 9000 became ubiquitous and its status as a requirement for doing business lessened the chances of anyone questioning whether it was doing any good.
In brief
Not everyone is happy with the widespread implementation of ISO 9000. In the United Kingdom, one of the standard’s strongest critics is John Seddon, Managing Director of Vanguard Consulting1), who has written the book, In Pursuit of Quality: The Case Against ISO 9000. In the following article, Mr. Seddon summarizes his arguments against ISO 9000 which he castigates for what he sees as its “command and control” orientation. This, he says, is in direct contrast to the flexible,