iso14000-digest Tuesday, January 27 1998 Volume 02 : Number 022
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 09:34:07 +0200 (WET)
From: aboura@aix.meng.auth.gr
Subject: Statistical material iso14000
Aleksander regarding the statistical material for iso14000 registered
companies worldwide ypu may try:
http://omninet.co.jp/isoworld/english/ANALY14K.HTM
Angeliki Boura
- ---------------------------------------------------------
Angeliki Boura e-mail: aboura@aix.meng.auth.gr
Dipl. Mech. Eng., MSc
Laboratory of Heat Transfer and Environmental Engineering
Aristotle University Thessaloniki
Box 483, 54006 Thessaloniki, GREECE
Tel: +30 31 996011, 996139
Fax: +30 31 996012
URL: http://aix.meng.auth.gr
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 08:44:34 +0000
From: WJMASSIP@correu.gencat.es
Subject: ISO 14020
- ---------------------------- Forwarded with Changes ---------------------------
From: JOSEP 1 MASSIP MORENO at ccmail_mabr_secgen
Date: 1/19/98 6:07PM
To: owner-iso14000@quality.org at INTERNET
Receipt Requested
Subject: ISO 14020
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
____________________________Cabecera de remisión________________________________
Asunto: ISO 14020
Autor: JOSEP 1 MASSIP MORENO en ccmail_mabr_secgen
Fecha: 19/1/98 18:07
I would like to know updated information about the ISO 14020
series.
If anybody knows something about when it will be aproved or any
internet adress I would be pleased of having that.
Thank you
Josep Masip
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 11:15:43 -0400 (GMT-0400)
From: Jose Bernardo Duran
Subject: ISO 14000 research group
Hi Mr. Frank
I work for The Woodhouse Partnership LTD an organization dedicated to
advisory and research in Maintenance and Operation of Industrial Plant.
I really want to share with these research group.
Best regards,
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
MSc Jose Bernardo Duran
Maintenance Engineering
Reliability Centered Maintenance
Total Productive Maintenance
World Class Maintenance Strategies
Address:
Av. 2 No. 36-2 Edf. Tintoreria Maracai
Merida Edo. Merida
Venezuela 5101
Phone: 058-74-639673 and 058-16-6742990
____________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 16:19:13 -0500 (EST)
From: "Bill Casti, CQA (System Administrator)"
Subject: Non-member submission from [rbl@hal.EPBI.CWRU.Edu (Robin B. Lake)] (fwd)
NOTE: Respond *both* to the poster's address (see BELOW line reading
"Forwarded Message") and to the list's posting address, OR as directed in
the posting, but definitely NOT to me.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Bill
=============================================================================
Bill Casti, CQA Email: help@quality.org
Domain Owner, QUALITY.ORG Pager: +1 800 604 6149
=============================================================================
- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 08:40:50 -0500 (EST)
From: rbl@hal.EPBI.CWRU.Edu (Robin B. Lake)
To: iso14000@cyberq.quality.org
Subject: Re: Re: Cost Benefits of Implementing ISO 14001
In an earlier posting, richard@frey.demon.co.uk said:
"For example, how much would Exxon have been willing to pay its fairy
godmother to avoid the Exxon Valdez incident? That sort of PR disaster is
a classic example of how a problem with a single operating unit can
impact the sales of an entire multinational structure. This is one reason
why companies such as ABB are implementing ISO 14001 at all their sites.
They are doing it for reasons of informed self-interest, not just to be nice.
Decentralised organisations just cannot
manage the day to day affairs of all their facilities, yet any one could
destroy the public standing of the whole.
"
I can give a risk-free estimate of what another major oil company would
NOT pay to avoid an iceberg-initiated incident in Price William Sound:
$1.5 million. Several years before the Exxon Valdez incident, I managed
a small group R&D effort to look at the prevalence of icebergs in
Prince William Sound and in the Valdez Shipping Lanes. Long story short,
the solution proposed was a radar overlooking the shipping lanes (from
that look angle, radar could discriminate ice from waves, which tanker
bridge radar could not) broadcasting the radar image
on an usused TV channel so that a $200 TV on a tanker's bridge could
show were icebergs (and incidently, ships) were. This could then be
monitored back at the Valdez Coast Guard office, also. Based on the cost
and the strong belief (old sea captain) that a tanker would never collide
with an iceberg (and certainly NOT with Bligh Reef, eh Capt. Bligh?), the
idea was rejected.
During a bridge game at a management development retreat, the risk was
mentioned to my partner, who happened to manage the corporate insurance.
Next working day, that incident was added to the insurance coverage and
thus saved the company $50 million of "self insurance risk"
when the "impossible" incident occurred.
Cheers,
Rob Lake
Environmental Modeling Inc.
rbl@po.cwru.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 09:59:26 +0100
From: "Goodman, Sally"
Subject: [none]
Dear Rob,
A belated reply to your message!
I agree with Connie Ritzert's comments that, once some time is taken to
understand the processes involved and, provided there is sufficient
environmental technical knowledge, some EMS software/templates can
provide a useful function in some cases. I have come across one example
of environmental software (developed by an industrial company in-house,
based on a commercially available model) which was very useful in
organising and communicating the EMS, but it was developed and used by
people with high environmental expertise. I still feel, though, that
there is a danger in buying "off the shelf" templates, therefore the
degree of advice and support provided by the provider could be an
important factor. There is, as Connie so rightly said, "no substitute
for thinking".
With kind regards,
Sally
PS Your website made interesting reading and there are good links to
othet sites.
Sally L Goodman
Product Manager AESC, DTP 325 (DNV)
Tel: +47 67 57 8213
Fax: +47 67 57 9705
Email: sally.goodman@dnv.com
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Rob [SMTP:rob@greenware.ca]
>Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 1998 5:11 PM
>To: sally.goodman@dnv.com; critzert@fyi.net; iso14000@quality.org
>Subject: EMS templates
>
>Dear Sally Goodman and Connie Glover Ritzert ,
>
>I'm responding to you criticism of templates for EMS.
>
>First off let me make it clear that I am the Director of Marketing and Sales
>for GreenWare Environmental Systems Inc., a consulting firm in Toronto,
>Canada that specializes in environmental software and publications.
>
>I agree with your assessment of software that provides an off the shelf
>solution for EMS, and DOES NOT require the user to invest the time and
>thought necessary to development and manage an EMS that suits the site it is
>intended for. However, the ISO 14001 standard contains requirements that
>must be met by all those aspiring to meet the standard. Therefore a
>framework for an EMS that takes those requirements into consideration is
>possible. The mistake that some software developers make is to limit the
>user's ability to use their knowledge and exercise judgement in conjunction
>with the content of the software.
>
>GreenWare produces software for assessing , implementing and auditing ISO
>14000 EMS. The software is not databased but document based and the
>implementation module results in an EMS manual for the user. The Audit
>module provides a full audit protocol, including controls and tests of
>controls, through our application of the audit risk module to an
>environmental audit. All modules are fully customizable by the user. Our
>software doesn't supplant the knowledge and judgement of the individual
>implementing the EMS, but rather provides a very effective and flexible
>framework for use. The result is a tool that is very effective and increases
>efficiency markedly.
>
>Please visit our website for information. I would be very interested in
>hearing back from you.
>
>
>Best regards,
>
>Robert Ganzhorn
>Robert Ganzhorn
>Director of Marketing and Sales
>GreenWare Environmental Systems Inc (http://www.greenware.ca)
>Specialists in environmental management information systems
>145 King Street East, Suite 200, Toronto, Ontario Canada M5C 2Y8
>tel: (416)363-5577 ext.123; fax: (416)367-2653; email: rob@greenware.ca
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 12:26:24 +0200 (WET)
From: aboura@aix.meng.auth.gr
Subject: EMAS-ISO14001
Hi!
Does anyone know where might be found information regarding the actual
differences between EMAS and ISO14001?
What are the trends in Europe?
Any statistical data for the European countries using EMAs versus ISO
14001?
What are the main issues that a European industry (in my case is a Greek
industry) has to consider in order to decide if it is more appropriate to
apply for EMAS certification rather than ISO 14001?
I would appreciate any information.
Thank you in advance.
- ---------------------------------------------------------
Angeliki Boura e-mail: aboura@aix.meng.auth.gr
Dipl. Mech. Eng., MSc
Laboratory of Heat Transfer and Environmental Engineering
Aristotle University Thessaloniki
Box 483, 54006 Thessaloniki, GREECE
Tel: +30 31 996011, 996139
Fax: +30 31 996012
URL: http://aix.meng.auth.gr
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 13:56:20 -0500
From: "Robert Clifford, Jr."
Subject: Re: EMAS-ISO14001
Angeliki Boura wrote:
>Does anyone know where might be found information regarding the actual
differences
>between EMAS and ISO14001?
In 1995, the Law Engineering Environmental Policy Center in Washington DC
(participating, at that time, with the Global Environmental Management
Initiative) put together an "ISO 14001 Comparison Matrix" that compared
ISO/DIS 14001 with BS 7750 and EMAS on an element-by-element basis. The
last address I had for them was:
Environmental Policy Center
2000 L Street NW, Suite 710
Washington DC 20036
202-296-7444
They might still have it available, or maybe even have put together an
update.
Robert Clifford, Jr., Vice President
ISO Environmental Consultancy, Inc.
1103 Glenwood Blvd.
Schenectady NY 12308-2503
518-393-3392
clifford@quality.org
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 16:45:13 -0400
From: Reinaldo Ramirez
Subject: EMAS versus ISO 140001 versus BS 7750 and ISO 9000
- --------------DE27D6C49D0FC69EB3FCFCDD
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Try this book: ISO 14000: A guide to the new Environmental Management
Standards by John Tibor and Ira Feldman. Irwin Professional Publishing.
1333 Burr Ridge Parkway. Burr Ridge, IL 60521. Phone: (800) 634-3966.
The Appendix A of this book has a complete comparative study of all the
standards mentioned in the subject.
You can try to find the book visiting httpp://www.asq.org. Ask for item
# P591. US$ 35.00
Reinaldo Ramirez
Caracas, Venezuela
- --------------DE27D6C49D0FC69EB3FCFCDD
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Try this book: ISO 14000: A guide to the new Environmental Management
Standards by John Tibor and Ira Feldman. Irwin Professional Publishing.
1333 Burr Ridge Parkway. Burr Ridge, IL 60521. Phone: (800) 634-3966. The
Appendix A of this book has a complete comparative study of all the standards
mentioned in the subject.
You can try to find the book visiting httpp://www.asq.org. Ask
for item # P591. US$ 35.00
Reinaldo Ramirez
Caracas, Venezuela
- --------------DE27D6C49D0FC69EB3FCFCDD--
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 16:08:58 -0500
From: "Neil G. Vander Linden"
Subject: EMAS-ISO14001 -Reply
The following site has many environmental links. Perhaps you can find
what you need here.
http://www1.tip.nl/~t643156/links2.htm
Dr. Neil Vander Linden
ISO 9001 & ISO 14001 Consultant
ngvande@westvaco.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 01:31:08 -0500 (EST)
From: "Bill Casti, CQA (System Administrator)"
Subject: Non-member submission from [Keith Forsyth ] (fwd)
NOTE: Respond *both* to the poster's address (see BELOW line reading
"Forwarded Message") and to the list's posting address, OR as directed in
the posting, but definitely NOT to me.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Bill
=============================================================================
Bill Casti, CQA Email: help@quality.org
Domain Owner, QUALITY.ORG Pager: +1 800 604 6149
=============================================================================
- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 12:11:25 -0500 (EST)
To: iso14000@quality.org
From: Keith Forsyth
Subject: ISO Consultants
Dear All,
Assuming that a company uses external consultants - as opposed to doing
the work in-house -to achieve an ISO certificate, which of the following
situations is the norm (if there is a norm):
1. the company aiming to achieve ISO certification will use the same
consultancy company for advising, implementing and accrediting; or
2. the company aiming to achieve ISO certification will use: one
consultancy company to advise on what is required to achieve ISO
certification and help implement any recommendations made by the
consultancy company. The company aiming to achieve ISO certification
will then use ANOTHER consultancy company for the accreditation.
I hope the above is clear and I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours faithfully,
Keith Forsyth
LTS International Ltd
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 01:47:15 EST
From: Marymcd1
Subject: Re: EMAS-ISO14001
a web site that I like to use is:
http://www.omnmet.co.jp/isoworld/english/analy14k.htm
and similar pages... like /analysis.htm, etc.
which contains a comparison of the registrations, by country of ISO 14001 and
EMAS. I know this site has been posted here before... just adding my two
cents' worth. It is also updated frequently, so it might be a good idea to
bookmark it...
Sincerely,
Mary McDonald
President and Principal Consultant
Individual Solution Options/Quality Services (ISO/QS)
http://members.aol.com/Marymcd1
Marymcd1@aol.com
512/282-0181
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 10:20:10 +0100
From: "Goodman, Sally"
Subject: Consultancy & certification
Dear Keith,
On 21 Jan you wrote:
>>Assuming that a company uses external consultants - as opposed to doing
the work in-house -to achieve an ISO certificate, which of the following
situations is the norm (if there is a norm):
1. the company aiming to achieve ISO certification will use the same
consultancy company for advising, implementing and accrediting; or
2. the company aiming to achieve ISO certification will use: one
consultancy company to advise on what is required to achieve ISO
certification and help implement any recommendations made by the
consultancy company. The company aiming to achieve ISO certification
will then use ANOTHER consultancy company for the accreditation.<<
You have raised a very important point, about which there is often
confusion.
First of all, let me clarify some of the terminology used.
"Accreditation" is the formal process which certification
bodies/registrars must go through to get their "licence to operate" as
an accredited certification body/registrar. There is an independent
Accreditation Authority (usually with the authority of the national
Government) in each country which has an accreditation scheme (not all
countries have their own schemes) which administers the scheme.
Examples of Accreditation Authorities are UKAS (UK), RAB (USA), JASANZ
(Australia), RvA (Netherlands), SWEDAC (Sweden), etc. The certification
body has to make a formal application to the Accreditation Authority and
then is subjected to audits and interviews by the Accreditation
Authority, which must satisfy itself that the certification body meets
the relevant "accreditation criteria". Until recently, most national
accreditation schemes had their own criteria, but with the move towards
mutual recognition by Accreditation Authorities, there are now two main
documents in use which specify criteria for certification bodies for ISO
14001 (there are slightly different requirements for ISO 9000). These
documents are EAC/G5 "Guidelines for the Accreditation of Certification
Bodies for Environmental Management Systems" published by the European
Accreditation of Certification, and ISO Guide 62 "IAF Guidance on the
Application of ISO/IEC Guide 62 for Bodies Operating Assessment and
Certification/Registration of Environmental Managements Systems (EMS)"
published by the International Accreditation Forum. Accreditation
provides assurance to potential certification customers that the
accredited certification body is operating to a known standard.
"Certification" is the process by which an independent third party is
contracted to perform an assessment according to defined specifications
(usually in a Standard such as ISO 14001). Accredited certification is
that which is carried out by an accredited certification body.
To get back to your original message - it is completely against the
rules of accreditation to have the same company provide consultancy and
then to carry out the certification for the same customer. Any company
or organisation which offers to do this should be treated with the
utmost suspicion. The reason for this rule in the accreditation
criteria is very sensible. It is to prevent possible conflicts of
interest. You can imagine the scenario - if the same team who has
provided the consultancy on implementing the EMS then carries out the
certification assessment, would they be likely to identify areas which
do not conform to the requirements in the Standard (against work they
have done themselves)? Even if different individuals from the same
company are involved in the two stages, they may be under pressure
(either direct or subconscious) not to raise non-conformities against
work done by their colleagues. This is why there are very strict
requirements in the accreditation criteria, requiring independence of
certification bodies and to not have any links between consultancy and
certification. If an accredited certification body were to carry out
consultancy for a company which is subsequently certifies, it runs the
risk of losing its accreditation (and thence its credibility).
Sorry to labour the point, but it is a very important one.
Just another point of terminology - you mentioned consultancy companies
carrying out accreditation (certification in this context). Consultancy
companies may carry out assessments as part of their service which may
be very similar in nature to a certification audit, but they do not
operate according to the strict requirements laid down in the
accreditation criteria for certification bodies. Also, they would not
be able to issue a certificate which is recognised in the international
marketplace, as are accredited certificates. Good consultants can
perform a very valuable service in assistance with implementation of
management systems and it is especially helpful if they have some
awareness/understanding of how the Standards are interpreted in the
certification context. I would also advise anyone considering
certification to ISO 14001 to obtain a copy of one of the two
accreditation documents (described in my second paragraph), as they give
very useful insight into the way in which a certification body carries
out its assessments. Both documents are very similar and which is used
depends on which country you are in. Copies should be obtainable from
your national accreditation authority.
I hope this helps to clarify the issue. Please get back to me if any of
this is insuficiently clear.
With kind regards,
Sally L Goodman
Product Manager Accredited Environmental Systems Certification, DTP 325
(DNV)
Tel: +47 67 57 8213
Fax: +47 67 57 9705
Email: sally.goodman@dnv.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 14:27:21 -0500
From: "Kenneth A. Clayman"
Subject: Re: Use of Consultants and Certification
Keith,
Essentially, a consultancy firm that provides assistance to an organization,
helping them to develop and/or implement their EMS, is prohibited under ISO
guidance and practices from also performing the certification/registration of
that same organization's system. This is considered a conflict of interests,
should the same consultancy assist and certify the organization.
Therefore, I guess the simple answer to your question is - Number 2. Hope this
helps.
Sincerely,
Kenneth A. Clayman, CHMM, CPG
Principal Consultant
Geo-Environmental Solutions
> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 12:11:25 -0500 (EST)
> To: iso14000@quality.org
> From: Keith Forsyth
> Subject: ISO Consultants
>
> Dear All,
>
> Assuming that a company uses external consultants - as opposed to doing
> the work in-house -to achieve an ISO certificate, which of the following
> situations is the norm (if there is a norm):
>
> 1. the company aiming to achieve ISO certification will use the same
> consultancy company for advising, implementing and accrediting; or
>
> 2. the company aiming to achieve ISO certification will use: one
> consultancy company to advise on what is required to achieve ISO
> certification and help implement any recommendations made by the
> consultancy company. The company aiming to achieve ISO certification
> will then use ANOTHER consultancy company for the accreditation.
>
> I hope the above is clear and I look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Yours faithfully,
>
> Keith Forsyth
> LTS International Ltd
- --
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Geo-Environmental Solutions
Management & Remediation for Industry and Government
6225 Prospect Street
Fredericksburg, VA 22407-8333
(540) 891-8110; (540) 891-7168 - Fax
gesolutions@interserf.net
PLEASE VISIT OUR WEB SITE!
http://www.gesolutions.com
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 1998 12:12:10 EST
From: Marymcd1
Subject: Re: EMAS-ISO14001 - Web address Correction
The web address for info should be
http://www.omninet.co.jp/isoworld/english/analy14k.htm
Sorry to those who tried and failed! I'll dubble chek my speeling next
time....
Mary
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 02:23:30 -0500
From: gjkettle@goodyear.com
Subject: Re: EMAS-ISO14001
Angeliki Boura wrote:
>Does anyone know where might be found information regarding the actual
differences
>between EMAS and ISO14001?
I work for Goodyear's design centre for tyres, in Luxembourg. In common with
competitors, we are moving the ISO 14001 direction in place of EMAS.
Why?
ISO 14001 is not so restrictive in publishing company data in the annual report.
We don't need to quote absolutes, only percentage figures.
The assessments are not so site-specific. If you have several units in one
physical location, you can have one certificate with ISO. With EMAS we were
told that individual site certification was a requirement.
I guess the main reason, though, is that EMAS is just not being
pushed/demanded. ISO 14001 gives you good systems, you divulge adequate
information on your discharges, energy consumption etc, and you have an
excellent check on your environmental affects on your surroundings.
Bottom line is ... our customers are asking for 14001 not EMAS!
For the specific differences, contact one of the certification bodies; Lloyds
Register Quality Assurance, BVQI, BSI etc. They are usually most helpful, and
they have web-site addresses (try 'Yahoo').
Best regards,
Dr GJ Kettle
Quality Systems
Goodyear Technical Centre
L-7750 Colmar-Berg
Email: gjkettle@goodyear.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 05:06:15 -0500
From: gjkettle@goodyear.com
Subject: ISO Consultants
Keith Forsyth wrote on Wed, 21 Jan 1998 12:11:25 -0500 (EST)
>
> Assuming that a company uses external consultants - as opposed to doing
> the work in-house -to achieve an ISO certificate, which of the following
> situations is the norm (if there is a norm):
>
> 1. the company aiming to achieve ISO certification will use the same
> consultancy company for advising, implementing and accrediting; or
>
> 2. the company aiming to achieve ISO certification will use: one
> consultancy company to advise on what is required to achieve ISO
> certification and help implement any recommendations made by the
> consultancy company. The company aiming to achieve ISO certification
> will then use ANOTHER consultancy company for the accreditation.
Maybe this is a different view, but our experience is not to use consultants
for certifications -- be it ISO 9000/14000, EMAS etc.
For us the 'golden steps' have been the following:
Determine your certification body (talk to other companies if in doubt)
Get them in to run awareness training (general & high level) for senior
management
Assign individuals for system writing / apprentice training etc
Train the above in the 'depths' of the appropriate Standard -- by your
assessment body (this only fails with QS9000 where European companies can only
use BVQI; it still works tho')
Train your auditors about 6-8 weeks later in your chosen Standard and then let
them start auditing your available system
Arrange 1,2 or more pre-assessments, preferably with the Assessor who'll carry
out the assessment (pre-assessments are much cheaper - and - you get the
'interpretation' of the body that matters)
Go into your assessment with confidence ... and don't worry if you catch some
non-conformities at the first attempt; treat this as further training.
We have used this method from ISO 9000 to QS9000 and ISO 14000. This is not
intended to knock consultants. Our main reason in this approach is that in
'doing it yourself', you create the sense of ownership that makes the
difference from getting a piece of paper to establishing a useful and
User-liked system. But this is our approach. Othe approaches are not wrong ...
just different. It'd interesting to share experiences on both sides of the
consultant/no consultant theme.
Best regards,
Dr GJ Kettle
Quality Systems
Goodyear Technical Centre
L-7750 Colmar-Berg
Email: gjkettle@goodyear.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 08:41:17 -0500 (EST)
From: "Bill Casti, CQA (System Administrator)"
Subject: REMINDER: Archive
Remember that the digest of the ISO14000 list discussions is archived at
QUALITY.ORG, so if you're new to the list or missed some postings, you can
go back and review past postings without having to ask people to post "old
news" over and over again.
The archive is located at:
http://www.quality.org/ISO14000/digest-archives/14digest.html
Regards.
Bill
=============================================================================
Bill Casti, CQA Email: help@quality.org
Domain Owner, QUALITY.ORG Pager: +1 800 604 6149
President, Associated Quality Consultants, Inc. Fax: +1 703 834 8209
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit our Online Quality Resources Website and Bookstore at
http://www.quality.org
=============================================================================
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 12:45:20 -0500
From: Diana Baldi
Subject: ISO Consultants
The process and perceptions of using consultants and/or registrars has been
a ongoing source of controversy, especially as it pertains to conflicts of
interest and independence. This response has background then specific
points that should be useful to companies trying to decide about
consultants, trainers, and registrars.
The rules for accredited registrars for quality systems in several
countries "prohibit" training or consulting for those companies performing
registration audits. Some quality registrars responded by creating two
organizations with a "fire wall" (e.g., slightly different names, separate
legal entity). Even with this arrangement the controversies have remained
(some have informal marketing claims such as use of our services will
"guarantee" a successful registration audit).
For EMS registration systems, the rules for engagement for registrars ARE
DIFFERENT FROM THOSE FOR QUALITY SYSTEM REGISTRATION, especially for this
topic. Specifically the EMS framework for EMS registrars is ISO Guide
62, not EN45012. The separation of registrars from training and consulting
is more distinct in the IAF Guidance for Guide 62, which has been adopted
by several countries for the accreditation of EMS registrars.
Suggestions for companies:
1. As you look for a registrar, ask about their accreditation status for
EMS (accredited, in process, thinking about it). If the company also does
training or consulting via a fire-wall-protected part of the company for
quality AND has not been fully accredited for EMS, they may be likely to
think the same rules apply (i.e., they haven't been fully faced with the
details of EMS accreditation).
2. Consider which is more important to you--to have them continue
registration services for you or to provide training/consulting. You
should avoid both, and therefore I totally disagree with G. Kettle about
suggesting both be done by the registrar. As these EMS rules become more
known and enforced, to do both services, even through a perceived fire
wall, could cause problems (such as ability to use accredited registration
mark) for both the company and/or the registrar.
3. The perceived advantage of having the interpretations of the registrar
being included in training and/or intial audits seems to be related to
reducing auditor variability risk to the company. Why have someone with
different interpretations train us?? This makes the selection of whatever
trainer or consultant even more important.
As a trainer and consultant--my above comments can be viewed as
self-serving. I do, however, agree with nearly all the comments posted
about consultants that have been posted to this group the last few month.
CHOOSE YOUR TRAINER AND CONSULTANTS WISELY. I train many folks each
week as part of an accredited training course provider company. I work
with companies doing intitial gap assessments (audits). I see gap
assessment reports from a variety of companies, many of which are well
meaning, but useless for strategic planning for implementation EMS. A
common question asked on this users group is how much time and benefit will
my company invest or gain? It is therefore critical for the initial audit
or gap assessment to be done by competent personnel, whether they are
competently trained internal personnel or external contractor.
Since this is still a new standard, there are lots of folks trying to gain
experience any way they can (be wary of those free audits unless you FULLY
understand they are intended to train the auditors).
I hope this clarification of a key differenence between QMS and EMS
registration rules is helpful. My goal is to help well-meaning companies
avoid and inadvertant error just due to the early stages of understanding
of the EMS processes. If you are comparing external sources of EMS(or QMS)
assistance, check our web site: http://www.xlp.com.
Respectfully,
Diana Baldi
Excel Partnership, Inc.
personal email: baldifamily@compuserve.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 12:55:42 EST
From: ASchoffm@aol.com
Subject: ISO Consultants/Certification
Can someone post the final language in the RAB rules for EMS registrars
regarding consulting vs. registering. It was my understanding that the rules
prohibited a registrar from consulting for the same company and vice-versa
even if the consulting and registrar divisions are separate entities within
the same company.
Alan Schoffman
TEAM 14000, Inc.
aschoffm@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 13:50:21 -0500
From: Diana Baldi
Subject: ISO Consultants/Certification
The specific language in the International Accreditation Forum (IAF)
Guidance on the Application of ISO/IEC Guide 62 for Bodies Operating
Assessment and Certification/Registration of Environmental Management
Systems June 1, 1997 (issue 1) has several references to issue of
consultancy and training and separation from registration services. There
are several lengthy references within the document on this subject--too
long to retype here, at least for me).
Guide 62, Section 2.1.2 Structure and IAF guidance G2.1.22-29 are the key
references.
The accrediting body for your country decides how this guidance document is
applied within their accreditation scheme for registrars.
Respectfully,
Diana Baldi
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 98 11:33:18 +0000
From: richard@frey.demon.co.uk
Subject: Re: Use of Consultants and Certification
Sally Goodman has done her usual excellent job of carefully defining the
question before answering it, whereas I would like to answer the question
which was not asked: should we use a consultant for ISO 14001
implementation or do it in-house?
The advantage of doing all the work in-house is that you keep external
costs to a minimum. The disadvantage is that you not have the benefits
of previous experience and risk falling into all the same pitfalls that
others have fallen into. In addition, you have somehow to acquire the
tools and techniques to do the job. The task can therefore become a
voyage of exploration rather than progression along a clear, planned
route to a well-defined goal. Overall costs may be higher than
otherwise, there may be more bureaucracy, and the value of the result may
be different.
In deciding which way to go, you have to balance those support costs
against the benefits. It's like any situation - getting a car fixed, for
example - where you have a choice between doing it yourself or getting
someone else to do it. If it's important that the car run reliably
afterwards, you will get professional help. If it's just for running
around town, you may prefer to do it yourself. As a consultant, I am
hopelessly biased - my car goes to the garage.
Incidentally, the going rate for EMS support is around twice the car
mechanic's rate in this area, so we are not talking big bucks.
Having said that, environmental management is more to do with management
than with environment. I have a suspicion that many environmental
consultancies think that their technical experience would give them a
killer advantage with ISO 14001. The reverse may be the case if the
technical stuff gets in the way of working with rather than against a
client company's systems. The worst EMS task I ever had was a salvage
job trying to clear up after a major international consultancy had made a
mess of things. For me, it's just like riding a bike: experience is the
only thing which really matters. But then you would expect me to say
that...
Best wishes,
Richard Frey
Frey Environmental Associates Limited
Specialists in the design and implementation
of environmental management systems.
http://www.frey.demon.co.uk
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 09:17:22 -0500
From: Diana Baldi
Subject: Re: Use of Consultants and Certification
>From a consultant's point of view, common "mistakes" I've seen done by
companies that have "tried it alone" seem seated in two areas:
1. ... basing their understanding of the standard on reading it and
general discussion about it. This fundamentally fails even a very
qualified staff. They most often miss the synergies of the standard from
one clause to another. The end result is a robot-type management system
instead of a living support system to the business. For some companies,
however, this type of improvement can be better than what they had before
the start. It is just difficult to maintain it (continuing to devote
resources to a system that doesn't seem to add value to the bottom line).
One "fix" to this is to ensure the internal staff receive comprehensive and
reliable training based upon solid interpretations of the standard and have
a clear understanding of the organization's commitment to the EMS so the
system can be appropriately designed.
2.... assembling or organizing the pieces of the existing EMS and calling
that 14001. This seems to be more common in some EMS pilot projects where
individual clauses are approached as distinct requirements. This strategy
may meet the "minimal" requirements of 1400, it may even be a significant
improvement for the company, but does not seem to provide visible,
strategic, long-term value back to the company.
If you are looking for assistance, Excel Partnership (worldwide offices)
offers a variety of training and consulting services and can tailor any
service to your specific needs. We can help you determine the level of
training for your specific needs and your desired level of
"do-it-yourself". Our goal is for our training participants to be able to
USE the information in their work. Many clients have been able to achieve
registration with only this initial training support. Other clients,
however, want or need periodic strategic support, leadership of the team,
or full documentation assistance.
Respectfully,
Diana Baldi
baldifamily@compuserve.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 15:22:04 -0400
From: Reinaldo Ramirez
Subject: Marketing in the IS0 14000 discussion group
Is this group a commercial group or a professional group looking a
better understanding of the ISO 14001?
If Miss Baldi is promoting Excel Partnership: May I promote my Company?
I wait a word from the System Administrator.
Respectfully
Reinaldo Ramirez
Perry Johnson, Inc.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 15:47:34 -0500
From: "Tatsch, C. E. (Gene)"
Subject: RE: Marketing in the IS0 14000 discussion group
I'll jump in here as the moderator, suggesting that I believe it will be
difficult (impossible??) to separate professional discussion from
self-promotion. The horns of the dilemma are that the most
knowledgeable and helpful will be those engaged in ISO 14000
implementation activities -- and developing this expertise in a
commercial context.
The delicate balance will be difficult for each of us to maintain, as
you note. I suggest that we continue discussion: if you believe your
company offers a unique perspective and contribution, then it seems to
me that that, too, is something to be communicated to the whole
discussion group.
Perhaps I'm making too-fine a distinction, but I'd hope we'd not
"promote" our organizations,
yet we each should have some distinctives that the rest should know
about, as appropriate.
Gene --
ISO 14000 moderator
> ----------
> From: Reinaldo Ramirez[SMTP:rrramirez@cantv.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 1998 2:22 PM
> To: Bill Casti, CQA (System Administrator)
> Cc: ISO 14001 discussion group
> Subject: Marketing in the IS0 14000 discussion group
>
Is this group a commercial group or a professional group looking
a
better understanding of the ISO 14001?
If Miss Baldi is promoting Excel Partnership: May I promote my
Company?
I wait a word from the System Administrator.
Respectfully
Reinaldo Ramirez
Perry Johnson, Inc.
------------------------------
End of iso14000-digest V2 #22
*****************************