Quality Magazine Wants to Remind You that ISO Consultants Are On Meth

If it’s time to update ISO 9001, then you know what that means: it’s time for ISO consultants to lose their damn minds in a mosquito fever dream of panic, sweat, and lofty pontificating, all to sell you their dubious services.

Enter Andy Nichols, formerly an NQA sales rep who is now shilling his ISO consulting services because nothing prepares you more for shop floor implementations than, you know, being the sales guy at a certification body. Nichols was feted as an ISO expert over at Elsmar, so that should tell you all you need to know right there. Then, acting as blogger for NQA, he literally called himself an “entrepreneur“ for running a consultancy for (snort) three years. (Pro tip: only self-promoting cringelords call themselves “entrepreneurs.” Real entrepreneurs wouldn’t let the word get past their back molars.)

In a recent piece in Quality Magazine (paywalled), Nichols goes so far off the deep end that one wonders if a call for an ambulance might be in order. What you’re about to read is so batshit crazy, even pieces of batshit would scurry away to a different corner of the bat cage to get away from him. I half expected the article to end with a shot of Nichols in an asylum, wrapped up tight and surrounded by loons, like the ending of The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari.

In his piece, Nichols enters a fugue state, imagining things that not only never happened but never will happen. It begins with this curious bit, showing that Quality Magazine is so desperate for “content,” they can’t be bothered to read the stuff they let people publish on their site:

The TC 176 committee decided, some time ago, that there was no compelling reason to change the 2015 revision and, as a result, started the process with a view to a revision in 2025.

Did you catch that? The first part of this sentence contradicts the second part. His says that TC 176 decided not to change the standard and addressed that by starting a revision anyway.

His obvious error was closer to the truth than he thinks, but not in the way he presented it. What actually happened is that the world told TC 176 not to update ISO 9001, and they did anyway so guys like Nichols could sell their consulting services. Again, no editor jumped in here.

Nichols assures us he hasn’t seen the revised standard (“only a few individuals – those who are closest to the people reviewing the requested revisions – actually know“) and ignores the fact that the Committee Draft 2 has already leaked, and I published multiple teardowns of it. You can almost hear Nichols’ lament that he wasn’t one of the Chosen Few who got an official copy.

So what does Nichols say about this standard he hasn’t seen? He tells companies to essentially break out their credit cards, suggesting they subscribe to services like GlobalSpec to ensure they know when the standard is updated. Because I guess you would never know otherwise?

Then, Nichols invents a requirement out of thin air and says that not only must you “plan” the implementation of the new standard, you have to write it down. (He says “draw it up,” but it’s the same thing.) The ISO 9001 standard does not require documented QMS change management. Should it? Yes, but TC 176 won’t put those words into the standard, so, no, you don’t have to “draw up” anything.

Nichols then says the changes will “at a minimum” require you to look at all the resources in clause 7, but he mistakenly quotes it as “7.1.” Ignoring the rookie error, none of that is true, and it’s entirely dependent on the company.

At which point, the high kicked in, and Nichols went even-batshittier-still. He says you will need to see “if there’s a need to change competencies of the personnel employed.” He then goes on to imagine a scenario that clearly suggests his drug dealer sold him the bottom shelf shit:

By way of example, if the new version of the standard required some type of behavioral evaluation of staff to ensure they are assigned to appropriate positions and roles, it may be important to have someone in the organization become competent in the use of the various tools (D.i.S.C. theory etc.) Simply sending someone on a training course isn’t likely to accomplish this.

I had to look up DISC theory, only to find out it’s a psychological tool invented by William Moulton Marston in 1928 — yes, just about 100 years ago — and includes a psychological profile which then “categorizes individuals into four personality traits: dominance, inducement, submission, and compliance.” I wonder if Nichols has a safe word for his BDSM gig?

First, there is no indication that ISO 9001 will include “behavioral” requirements for employees. It’s so ludicrous on its face, I am stunned that someone even thought of it; but then, here’s Andy Nichols. Next, even if it did, there’s nothing to suggest ISO 9001 would require a company to utilize a century-old psychological profiling tool to meet it.

He’s not done there. Apparently in an effort to get cast as the next Doctor Who, Nichols travels through time once again, going back to 1956 to cite “Bloom’s Taxonomy” which he then footnotes with a link that doesn’t even fucking work. (Great job, Quality Magazine.) Yes, you are supposed to think Nichols is very, very smart and probably wears tweed jackets with leather elbows, listens to Miles Davis when people are looking, and reads Ayn Rand while sipping brandy.

Nichols closes on a bungled bit of misinformation that makes me think he has utterly forgotten all those years working for NQA. He makes up a claim — entirely out of his head — that companies will be given “18 months” to transition from their current QMS to the new one prompted by ISO 9001:2026.

If we look at the nature of the changes, we could perhaps predict that the nature of the 2026 changes will be somewhat limited in nature and, hence, the timeframe may be anticipated to be 18 months – based on previous changes and associated timeframes.

Nichols must know that ISO and IAF always — always! — apply a 3-year rule for transitions to new standards. Now, I’m not a genius who can quote Bloom and Moulton Marston, but I do know that three years is 36 months, not 18. (Checks calculator.) Yes, I’m right.

Unless Nichols knows something no one else does? After all,  ISO and IAF colluded to make the new “climate change” addendum retroactive, giving companies ZERO years to transition. (That showed how serious ISO was about climate change, allowing no time at all for companies to be thoughtful about their impacts on climate.) But, no, Nichols doesn’t know anything; he’s just making up a fact that doesn’t exist.

In the end, it’s the usual script. ISO does an update, the consultants come out of the woodwork rubbing their hands like cartoon villains, boasting about how a certain change or another will be “the biggest boon to consultants ever,” and promptly go on to rip off entire industries.

What do we really know? Again, check out my teardown of the new requirements, per the latest Committee Draft, and that will help. Then, understand that Oxebridge will release a free kit to help companies update when the time comes. Free as in we get zero dollars. You won’t even have to submit an email address. In the end, it will cost you less than the Quality Magazine subscription you have to buy to read their unedited junk articles.