As I mentioned earlier, ISO 9001 registrar NQA-USA is hosting a pricey seminar on transitioning to ISO 9001:2015 featuring ISO Technical Management Board representative Susan LK Briggs. Ms. Briggs is one of the top architects of the controversial “Annex SL” mandate forced on all ISO Technical Committees, bypassing the normal consensus development process of ISO standards. She’s also the only one who is bold enough to admit her role in it.
But then, she’s had no problem helping to promote guys who use fake catfish accounts featuring stolen eyebrow model photos in order to sell unaccredited risk manager certificates, either.
I’ve written to a host of ISO representatives in the past few months, asking for official comments and background on the Annex SL development, and specifically how they can claim Annex SL was developed “by consensus” when the text was taken from a scrapped document called ISO Guide 83, which was rejected by consensus and failed to make it out of draft. Rather than revise Guide 83 and hammer it into a shape the world could adopt, Ms. Briggs’ TMB took the unprecedented step of simply cutting and pasting the text into the mandatory ISO Consolidated Supplement document, for which there is no consensus voting, and under which all ISO TC’s must operate lest they be disbanded.
Not surprisingly, few of the ISO leaders have responded to the requests for information, Ms. Briggs included. These folks have no problem speaking at expensive events and claiming credit for (imagined?) ISO praise, but when asked to back these actions up with facts or historical data, they clam up. When asked simple questions on how the TMB operates, or how decisions are made, they won’t reply at all.
The good thing about people who make public appearances is that they can’t dodge questions from the podium as easily as they can refuse to respond to emails or phone calls. So, at the risk of helping NQA cash in on this mess, I invite anyone who intends on attending the NQA “Transition Roadshow” to ask Ms Briggs one simple question:
If the text of Annex SL was rejected, by consensus, during the development of ISO Guide 83, how do you justify forcibly inserting it into a mandatory procedural document (the ISO Consolidated Supplement) while continuing to claim that ISO management system standards are developed by consensus of their member nations?
Feel free to capture her response, and send it in.
Christopher Paris is the founder and VP Operations of Oxebridge. He has over 35 years’ experience implementing ISO 9001 and AS9100 systems, and helps establish certification and accreditation bodies with the ISO 17000 series. He is a vocal advocate for the development and use of standards from the point of view of actual users. He is the writer and artist of THE AUDITOR comic strip, and is currently writing the DR. CUBA pulp novel series. Visit www.drcuba.world
