The ways of QMS assessments by Certification body M, K and N (2002,May.1w)

1. Certification body M
　 (1) The first claim to the body by Company A
The preliminary assessment done by the body (foreign affiliated) was unfair one, because it was not based on ISO10011-1. The assessor pointed out twelve nonconformities but they had not been identified in terms of the specific requirements of Standard ("shalls") against which the audit had been conducted. Therefore, the company made a claim to the body.Soon a manager of the body answered the claim, but he dodged the claim.
　 (2) The second claim
Then the company made the second claim, conferring with me. It took several days to answer for the manager for the claim. Finally he apologized the way of the assessment by the assessor and promised to do a fair assessment based on " shalls " in the final assessment. Thus I can count the body as one of good bodies.
2. Certification body K

     A client company of one of my friends selected the body (domestic affiliated), which I warned to be careful the way of the assessment by the body. As expected, at the preliminary assessment many nonconformities, which had no relation with " shall" requirements.

Soon the company made a claim to a manager of the body. The manager in return phoned to the management representative saying that we were not doing assessments according to " shall " and when we thought something necessary to add to " shall ", we did add and in reverse when we thought some " shalls " as unnecessary, we deleted them. We decided those. ISO9001: 1994 has clear " shalls " but ISO9001: 2000 has not. ISO10011-1 was not binding preliminary assessments. The body ignores basic international rules of ISO9001 assessments. The best way for an auditee is not to select such bodies from the beginning.

3. Certification body N

     One day a management representative of the Company B came to me and asked for me to introduce good certification bodies. I wondered why he asked such a favor, because the company already has registration of ISO9001:1994 by the certification body N(domestic affiliated).To my question he said that the body forced its standards and it has made so wasteful paper works that people of the company has showed demoralization.

At the transition from ISO9001: 1994 to ISO9001: 2000 he wanted to change the certification body to make lean ISO9001: 2000 system. I pointed out several bodies and finally found there are no Japanese affiliated bodies among them!