The exact circumstances of the consultant\u2019s departure from their prior job would, of course, determine the level of baggage they bring with them on their journey. For some, the departure was friendly enough and had little impact on the consultant\u2019s mindset. For others, the departure was a dumpster fire, and the consultant\u2019s worldview has been permanently tainted.<\/p>\n
This manifests in demonstrable results. ISO 9001 is the world\u2019s most famous ISO standard, and covers the subject of quality management systems. It is based on the 1950\u2019s defense standard MIL-Q-9858, and was first published in 1987. We literally have decades<\/strong> <\/em>of experience with its content and surrounding ecosystem.<\/p>\n Over many revisions, drafted by quality management consultants who dominate the ISO 9001 technical committee, the standard has changed to reflect the personalities of its authors. Clause 5.1 on \u201cLeadership\u201d has grown into a monstrous list of personal grievances, demanding that \u201ctop management\u201d demonstrate respect and obedience to the QA function. Some of ISO 9001\u2019s authors admitted to me, during the many interviews I made while writing Surviving ISO 9001<\/strong><\/em><\/a>, that yes, they were frustrated and wanted to have the risk of de-certification<\/strong><\/em> weighing over the heads of executives who denied them a seat at the executive table.<\/p>\n This means that the quality consultants had failed in making the case for their discipline, and were relying instead on brute force \u2013 knowing that government and prime contracts often demand ISO 9001 certification as a condition for bidding \u2013 to get their day in the sun.<\/p>\n Deming Was An Asshole<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n We also see this with the mythology surrounding quality\u2019s foremost \u201cguru,\u201d W. Edwards Deming. The mythology goes that Deming was a genius who developed many modern quality concepts, tried to pitch them to the UK and US, and was snubbed. He then took his ideas to Japan and single-handedly saved that country, turning \u201cMade in Japan\u201d from a 1970\u2019s snide insult to the quality imprimatur we recognize today.<\/p>\n The reality is not that. Deming was a sullen, irritable, and often angry guy, who alienated his audience by demanding loyalty to his ideas, and then accusing critics of heresy. His publications are replete with pompous attacks against the powers who rejected him. Deming failed to sell his ideas because he was a miserable messenger. In Japan, he had more success, but even some of that was based on him repackaging ideas already present in that country, developed by actual Japanese. Deming benefited from the post-war, racist \u201cwhite savior\u201d myth that only an old British guy could turn around those yellow savages.<\/p>\n To this day, Deming is mis-worshipped, based on this mythology. Worse, following Deming has turned into a mindless cult, where his acolytes now try to shoehorn in ideas from the 1960s into 21st-century\u00a0technological advances like AI, quantum computing, and continuous automated production.<\/p>\n Repeating History<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n The cybersecurity and CMMC crowd are now repeating history. Once again, the standard and certification scheme has been handed over to the private consultants for stewardship. Once again, those same consultants are willing to make the standards complicated in order to sell \u201cdeciphering\u201d services afterward. Once again, those consultants are failing to win over the hearts and minds of their intended audience, failing in their messaging, and instead relying on the \u201cstandards bully pulpit\u201d to beat companies into submission.<\/p>\n There is a troubling \u2013 and noisy \u2013 caucus of consultants who demand CMMC compliance, for example, on the argument that \u201cyou have been legally required to be NIST compliant already, so if you\u2019re not ready for CMMC, that\u2019s your own fault.\u201d<\/p>\n To which the Defense Industrial Base says, \u201chey, you\u2019re kind of a dick<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n The ISO quality folks did the same thing, pointing back to contractual requirements for MIL-Q-9858 compliance. Over the past 30+ years, the argument only backfired. ISO 9001 adoption in the US has dropped off to all-time lows, with the intended user base rejecting the argument and, frankly, getting pissed off at those saying it.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.oxebridge.com\/emma\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/09\/isosurvey2019_usaonly.jpg\")
<\/a>