Courtesy: ISO 9001 2015 Certification
A common criticism of ISO 9000 and 9001 is the amount of money, time, and paperwork required for a complete implementation, and later when needed, ISO 9001 certification. Dalgleish cites the “inordinate and often unnecessary paperwork burden” of ISO, and says that “quality managers feel that ISO’s overhead and paperwork are excessive and extremely inefficient”. The level of minimum documentation for a minimum scope organization has been greatly reduced, going from ISO 9001:2000 to ISO 9001:2008 to ISO 9001:2015.
According to Barnes, “Opponents claim that it is only for documentation. Proponents believe that if a company has documented its quality systems, then most of the paperwork has already been completed”. Wilson suggests that ISO standards “elevate inspection of the correct procedures over broader aspects of quality”, and therefore, “the workplace becomes oppressive and quality is not improved”.
One study showing reasons for not adopting this standard include the risks and uncertainty of not knowing if there are direct relationships to improved quality, and what kind and how many resources will be needed. Additional risks include how much certification will cost, increased bureaucratic processes and risk of poor company image if the certification process fails. According to John Seddon, ISO 9001 promotes specification, control, and procedures rather than understanding and improvement. Wade argues that ISO 9000 is effective as a guideline, but that promoting it as a standard “helps to mislead companies into thinking that certification means better quality, … [undermining] the need for an organization to set its own quality standards”. In short, Wade argues that reliance on the specifications of ISO 9001 does not guarantee a successful quality system.
The standard is seen as especially prone to failure when a company is interested in certification before quality. Certifications are in fact often based on customer contractual requirements rather than a desire to actually improve quality. “If you just want the certificate on the wall, chances are you will create a paper system that doesn’t have much to do with the way you actually run your business”, said ISO’s Roger Frost. Certification by an independent auditor is often seen as the problem area, and according to Barnes, “has become a vehicle to increase consulting services”.
Dalgleish argues that while “quality has a positive effect on return on investment, market share, sales growth, better sales margins and competitive advantage,” “taking a quality approach is unrelated to ISO 9000 registration.” In fact, ISO itself advises that ISO 9001 can be implemented without certification, simply for the quality benefits that can be achieved.
Abrahamson argues that fashionable management discourse such as Quality Circles tends to follow a lifecycle in the form of a bell curve, possibly indicating a management fad