Role of Governments in ISO 14001 Standards

Although ISO 14001 is a set of voluntary standards that individual companies may or may not choose to adopt, governments can clearly have a role in providing information, establishing the necessary framework and infrastructure, and, in some cases, helping companies to develop the
basic capabilities to adopt ISO 14001. There are wo particular areas in which government action would be useful:
(a) providing information on he sectors and markets where ISO 14001 certification s a significant issue and assisting sector rganizations to develop appropriate responses, and
(b) helping to establish a certification framework, ased on strengthening national standards organizations and encouraging competitive private sector provision of auditing and certification
services. At present, the World Bank is having discussions with a number of countries about how assistance could be provided with these issues.

Governments should see EMS approaches as part of a broad environmental strategy that includes regulatory systems, appropriate financial incentives, and encouragement of improved industrial performance. Such encouragement can really only be effective where there is cooperation at the government level between the relevant departments, including industry and trade, as well as environment. There is a growing interest in integrating environmental management issues into productivity or competitiveness centers designed to promote SME performance, but little information exists on experience to date.

IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE FOR ISO 9001:2008

This Implementation Guidance has been developed to assist users in understanding the issues that need to be considered during the co-existence period between ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 9001:2008.

While the changes between ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 9001:2008 are expected to have a limited impact on users, some arrangements regarding implementation are needed.

Note: To reflect the limited scope of the changes the term “implementation” is now being used to make a clear distinction with the former “transition” from ISO 9001:1994 to ISO 9001:2000, when there were significant changes throughout the standard.

A wide diffusion of this implementation guidance is recommended, in particular the comparison table between ISO 9001:2008 and ISO 9001:2000, given in Annex B to ISO 9001:2008.

ISO 9001:2008 has been developed in order to introduce clarifications to the existing requirements of ISO 9001:2000 and to improve compatibility with ISO 14001:2004. ISO 9001:2008 does not introduce additional requirements nor does it change the intent of the ISO 9001:2000 standard.

Certification to ISO 9001:2008 is not an “upgrade”, and organizations that are certified to ISO 9001:2000 should be afforded the same status as those who have already received a new certificate to ISO 9001:2008 No new requirements were introduced in this edition but, in order to benefit from the clarifications of ISO 9001:2008, users of the former version will need to take into consideration whether the clarifications introduced have an impact on their current interpretation of ISO 9001:2000, as changes may be necessary to their QMS In order to assist organizations to have a full understanding of the new ISO 9001:2008, it may be useful to have an insight on the revision process, how this revision reflects the inputs received from users of the standard, and the consideration given to benefits and impacts during its development.

Prior to the commencement of a revision (or amendment) to a management system standard, ISO/Guide 72:2001 Guidelines for the justification and development of management system standards recommends that a “Justification Study” is prepared to present a case for the proposed project and that it outlines details of the data and inputs used to support its arguments. In relation to the development of ISO 9001:2008 user needs were identified from the following:

- the results of a formal “Systematic Review” on ISO 9001:2000 that was performed by the members of ISO/TC 176/SC2 during 2003-2004

- feedback from the ISO/TC 176/Working Group on “Interpretations”

- the results of an extensive worldwide “User Feedback Survey on ISO 9001 and ISO 9004″ by ISO/TC 176/SC 2/WG 18 and similar national surveys.

The Justification Study identified the need for an amendment, provided that the impact on users would be limited and that changes would only be introduced when there were clear benefits to users.

The key focuses of the ISO 9001:2008 amendment were to enhance the clarity of ISO 9001:2000 and to enhance its compatibility with ISO14001:2004.

A tool for assessing the impacts versus benefits for proposed changes was created to assist the drafters of the amendment in deciding which changes should be included, and to assist in the verification of drafts against the identified user needs. The following decision making principles were applied:

1) No changes with high impact would be incorporated into the standard;

2) Changes with medium impact would only be incorporated when they provided a correspondingly medium or high benefit to users of the standard;

3) Even where a change was low impact, it had to be justified by the benefits it delivered to users, before being incorporated.

The changes incorporated in this ISO 9001:2008 edition were classified in terms of impact into the following categories:

- No changes or minimum changes on user documents, including records

- No changes or minimum changes to existing processes of the organization

- No additional training required or minimal training required

- No effects on current certifications

The benefits identified for the ISO 9001:2008 edition fall into the following categories:

- Provides clarity

- Increases compatibility with ISO 14001.

- Maintains consistency with ISO 9000 family of standards.

- Improves translatability.

KEY CONSIDERATIONS IN IMPLEMENTING ISO 9001 IN SMEs

There are many issues that must be addressed in moving the QMS from the initial state to the desired state. For example, all organizations implementing ISO 9001 will need to consider the unique culture within the organization, its size, and the resources available. Beyond those widely discussed points, three issues that merit particular attention are (1) consideration of the QMS as a parallel function, (2) training, and (3) auditing. Key points associated with these issues are discussed below.

Consideration of QMS as Parallel Function

In the case of all of the transitions depicted, real benefits from the QMS are more likely to be experienced if the QMS is implemented directly into the core structure of the organization. SMEs must be cautious against establishing a QMS that is run separately in parallel to its other systems. In SMEs, the parallel subsystem most commonly exhibits itself as a separate Quality Assurance, or in some cases, ISO 9001 department. Possible reasons for this may include the existence of rigid departmental boundaries in some SMEs or overemphasis on core activities. As Yauch and Steudel [10] note, SMEs tend to focus their attention on “…necessary routine activities (such as sales, production, shipping, etc.) rather than activities aimed at improving processes or systems.” If a SME insists on establishing a separate quality department, its level of effectiveness can be increased by embedding the QMS in widely-used organizational systems where practical. The integration is largely a function of how well the QMS manages to share information with other subsystems and its ability to align with the policies, norms, goals, and values in place throughout the organization.

Training

In SMEs, training and staff development is more likely to be ad hoc and small scale because of modest human and financial resources and the absence of a specific training budget. To prevent the problems arising from lack of education and training, two things must be done:

1. Education of Top Management: The centralization of decision-making processes within many SMEs means that the management can either be the main stumbling block to change or the main catalyst for change. Therefore, any approach to ISO 9001 implementation must involve considerable education for the top management of the organization to create awareness and understanding of the implementation process as a change initiative. Implementing a fully functional and documented QMS requires motivation by top management to appreciate, achieve, and implement the necessary measures to meet the standards’ criteria.

2. Education and Training of Employees: SMEs are often under pressure to quickly gain ISO 9001 registration. Meeting the requirements of the standard in a short period of time can prove a formidable obstacle for a small company. Since most SMEs do not possess the needed expertise internally, they may be inclined to hire external experts to provide the necessary technical expertise and manpower. However, having a functioning and documented QMS requires more than that. It requires ensuring that all employees in the organization clearly know what is expected of them and how they can contribute to the attainment of their organizations’ goals. This will likely require the preparation and implementation of a training plan tailored specifically to the unique characteristics and maturity level of the SME.

Auditing

As emphasized throughout the paper, a QMS is not going to produce the expected results unless it is fully functional. While auditing must therefore verify the existence of the necessary documentation, it must also focus on the functionality of the QMS. The measurement of the functionality and the qualitative and financial impacts of a QMS have been the subject of several studies, including Kaynak [11]. Among the categories used to measure functionality and performance improvement, two are particularly noteworthy for our purposes: management commitment and employee involvement. A QMS cannot be functional in the absence of those two characteristics. Therefore, as a minimum, internal and external auditors should continually verify top management’s commitment to increased company-wide quality awareness and improvement in addition to employee involvement in the design, implementation, operation, and improvement of quality related processes and procedures.

ISO 14001:2004 Evaluation of compliance

This clause has been separated from 4.5.1 and includes two sub-clauses, as well as clarification and an addition to the ISO 14001:1996 standard. Included in Clause 4.5.1 of ISO 14001:1996 was a requirement for the organisation to periodically evaluate compliance with relevant (now applicable) environmental legislation and regulations. This requirement has been retained in Clause 4.5.2.1 of the revised standard. In Clause 4.5.2.2, ISO 14001:2004 includes evaluation of compliance with other requirements to which the organisation subscribes, which was not specifically required by ISO 14001:1996. This clarification also includes a requirement for records of periodic evaluations of compliance to be kept.

The UK-based Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) has published an opinion that this means that compliance against each and every piece of legislation / regulation relating to an organisation’s environmental aspects will need to be evaluated before it can be considered to be in conformity with ISO 14001: 2004; it will not be acceptable for organisations to claim that the periodic evaluation will be covered by their internal EMS audit program at some future date.

This has always been one of the most difficult issues in ISO 14001:2004, and organisations will need to review and revise their compliance procedures to ensure that they meet these new requirements.

Change In ISO 14001:2004 – Documentation

This clause has been updated to align it with ISO 19001:2004, but has not changed in intent. The listed EMS documentation now includes:

• the environmental policy,

• objectives and targets,

• a description of the scope of the EMS,

• a description of the main elements of the EMS and their interaction and reference to related documents, documents and records

• required by the standard, • documents and records determined by the organisation as necessary to ensure the effective planning, operation and control of processes that relate to the significant environmental aspects.

Formatting changes help align Clause 4.4.5 of ISO 14001:2004 with ISO 9001:2000. An additional clarification has been made to define records as a special type of document requiring control under Clause 4.5.4. A new addition to the requirements aims to ensure documents of external origin, (i.e. MSDS, permits) that are necessary to the system, are identified and their distribution is controlled.

Formatting changes help align Clause 4.4.5 of ISO 14001:2004 with ISO 9001:2000. An additional clarification has been made to define records as a special type of document requiring control under Clause 4.5.4. A new addition to the requirements aims to ensure documents of external origin, (i.e. MSDS, permits) that are necessary to the system, are identified and their distribution is controlled.

The revised standard requires documents required by the EMS and the standard to be controlled documents.

Note that “document” is included in the definitions, and includes its supporting medium which can be paper, magnetic, electronic or optical computer disc, photograph or master sample, or a combination thereof.