- Whistleblower Hotline
- Request Quote
Welcome to The O-Forum! Read this first! Then, feel free to introduce yourself here! If you need immediate, real-time support for the Oxebridge ISO 9001 or AS9100 Template Kits, click here to join our Slack chat channel.
It took only 24 hours from my last post (“IAF CertSearch Database of ISO Certificates Goes Live, and It’s a Mess“) before the IAF had to shut down their new website featuring a “global” database of ISO certificates. It seems that other than the Italians, no one actually entered any data, and the website is a buggy mess. Multiple users at the O-Forum reported that their companies were not listed, despite their ISO 9001 CB participating in the system.
Now if you visit http://www.iafcertsearch.org you get this:
Meanwhile, UKAS is still running a big press push on their website insisting the site will be up and running in April 2019 which, by my gold-encrusted, silver-fobbed pocket watch, was two months ago.
That same UKAS article, however, does point to another way IAF intends on monetizing this whole thing. Apparently, IAF intends on selling some sort of “IAF CertSearch Mark” and “Certified Trade Marketplace” status. Because clearly what the ISO certification scheme needs is more logos and more dubious marks you can buy without any hope of a return on investment.
If you thought they were just offering a service to help supply chain folks verify certificates without any strings attached, you were naive. Seriously, understand one thing: there is nothing the certification scheme actors will ever do that is purely for the good of industry or for reasons which are not solely in their self-interests. They are in this only for money, and that’s it.
So now IAF has to deal with another black eye, as their child was released from hospital and promptly called “ugly,” sending its parents back into hiding, in shame.
The botched rollout is indicative of the problems IAF faces, and which it is ignoring. If CBs don’t submit data, then the database is useless. And then, even when they do, if they submit flawed or impartial data, the IAF claims it’s not responsible, and the database is useless.
But getting paid to release useless stuff is IAF’s stock in trade, so at least they’re consistent.