UKASlogoThe United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) has determined that the practices and products of ISO 9001 registrar BSI  do not present a conflict of interest as they do not rise to the definition of “consulting.” UKAS issued this ruling in response to a complaint elevated to it by Oxebridge, which alleged widespread violations of ISO 17021 rules requiring a separation between consulting and certification auditing activities.

At the heart of the Oxebridge complaint was BSI’s Entropy software package, which is sold by BSI as a tool used to both manage and implement quality management systems. BSI was found to be certifying clients who purchased the software, and Oxebridge argued this presented a conflict of interest that robs BSI of objectivity. The complaint also indicated multiple examples of marketing language wherein BSI appears to be selling consulting services to its certification clients, outside of the Entropy software package.

UKAS took five months to conduct its investigation, which included two on-site assessments of BSI practices and records. The full response by UKAS can be read here.

While ruling on the side of BSI, UKAS nevertheless found some of BSI’s marketing language “caused confusion in the marketplace.” The UKAS report indicates that BSI has put “actions” in place to address this, and that UKAS would monitor this moving forward.

Oxebridge checked the examples that it has provided UKAS of questionable language, and found that none had been edited to date. For example, a web link claimingBSI Quality Management Self-assessment will help organizations implement ISO 9001 and monitor their compliance with its requirements” still contains the exact same language reported to UKAS.

UKAS reports that it conducted two on-site assessments, going beyond the single assessment normally required, and that it “reviewed the output of a number of certification audits” of users who had both purchased Entropy as well as those that did not. UKAS claims that there was “no difference in the level of rigor observed.”

The complaint was filed by Oxebridge VP Christopher Paris on behalf of ISO 9001 users and stakeholders worldwide. “While some questions remain over how BSI could objectively audit systems it helps design, in whatever small manner, the UKAS investigation at least appears to have been robust and thorough,” Mr. Paris said. “It gives me some level of confidence that they did what needed to be done.”

Oxebridge does not have a high confidence in UKAS’ claim that additional oversight over BSI’s marketing will be initiated, as BSI was likewise cited by US accreditation body ANAB in 2005, and was advised to examine its marketing then. That complaint was over the same subject of commingled consulting and certification offerings.

Of high concern is UKAS’ tacit permission for CB’s to provide “templates.” In the ruling, UKAS claims that the Entropy software is acceptable as it does “not go further than provide a template framework for an audit programme.”

“Because templates dictate the content of procedures, this means that BSI is providing forms and formats that will thus drive the procedure,” Mr. Paris said. “This has the net effect of BSI crafting the procedure for internal auditing, which is explicitly prohibited.”

Oxebridge expects the ruling will allow CBs unprecedented permission to craft certification clients’ quality system documentation by providing “templates”, instead of directly providing the procedures themselves.

“The ruling relies on already-stretched definitions of the term ‘consulting’ under rules written by the participants themselves, and until that core problem is resolved, similar rulings can be expected,” said Mr. Paris. “To any external observer, providing tools and training, and then assessing those tools and training, would be a conflict of interest. Only in the ISO certification sphere is this tolerated.”

Oxebridge will not be pursuing or escalating the complaint any further.

 

 

Advertisements

Aerospace Exports Inc

Why we report on these topics

Since 2000, Oxebridge has worked to improve ISO and related certification schemes by identifying problems and then proposing solutions. We report on issues affecting standards users because so few other news outlets do. Our belief is that in order to fix the problems in these schemes, we must first understand the nature and breadth of those problems. Our reporting aims to do just that. Elsewhere on the Oxebridge site you will find White Papers and other articles proposing ideas to correct these problems.