Interesting Discussion IAF CertSearch Database - Repository of "properly" Accredited Management System Certs

Michael Drechsel said:

This is just for information and clarification: There is no decision yet about the implementation of the CERTO-Database

Click to expand...

Michael, in LinkedIn, recently you posted a message that ISO had decided not to move forward with the CERTO database during their general plenary meeting in Rio de Janeiro. Could you clarify if the project was put on hold or killed altogether?

Didn't they have enough caipirinhas prior to the meetings?

While we wait to hear if the decision to halt the efforts on the development of the ISO CERTO database are true, not too long ago, ISO's Director of Operations talked about it, in a hopeful manner, as described on page 19 of ISO Focus, issue # 105.

According to the information (broken link removed), the CERTO database was cancelled altogether.

A summary of the project and the reason for it's cancellation can be seen below.


Leadership requires Vision. Too bad the people at the top can't see it.

Why do they not support it?

This is largely public information anyway (the confidential exceptions due to security concerns in the ISO 27001 field are a small minority), which they make available as individual CBs either on their websites or on a shared one. It's in databases.

I can't believe they can't afford it. A database that sucks information from other DBs and aggregates it can't be that hard or expensive.

So why not support it? Cynical answers related to competition come to mind - but surely CBs are ethical and above such pettiness. Aren't they?

Another thought: assuming Elsmar Cove finds a way of surviving, what's to stop it from offering a wiki of certified organizations for those that choose to participate? If it were led by purchasing mangers at the top of the food chain, it could develop a momentum, maybe - safer to be listed than not?

Bemusedly,
Pat

I'm not sure if a private database of ISO certified companies would be feasible but it's certainly an interesting idea. It could either be monetized directly or just by driving more traffic to the Cove.
My guess is that if it were successful ISO would then come looking for their slice of the pie.

I think the problem is cost and getting timely, accurate data, not to mention info in Sidney's graphic in his post in this thread - https://Elsmar.com/Forums/showpost.php?p=562410&postcount=23. I think this is one of those "good ideas" which are simply not feasible. If it was able to be monitized, and if getting accurate data from around the world was realistic, the project would not have been cancelled.

I think the problem is, as Sidney observes, leadership and vision, lack of.

I doubt the costs are enormous. The note says the project was cancelled because of a letter of opposition from TuV (one wonders what it said) and lack of support.

Organizations that run other management systems programmes - e.g. the SEI and their CMMI, Quest Forum and TL 9000, Six Sigma and Baldrige - persuade organisations to use their systems using data and research reports.

The ISO world has never done that. Coming from a military origin, it was DoD and MoD mandates upon suppliers of military equipment that forced its take-up. These days it's purchasing officers not only in the defence industry, but commerce and government too, that mandate its use. Indeed, one of the selling points of an ISO standard and CB audit programme is that you have to get certified to be able to bid for business. It's the only system that relies upon mandates from someone up the food chain.

I think the CBs and ABs could afford it, but do not see the potential return on their investment. They don't need it to generate business; mandates from above suffice. The lack of a central database only impacts the unwary and uneducated, who sometimes work with unaccredited certification bodies. For the accredited CBs this isn't a problem: they don't lose large volumes of business, and when the client rumbles the non-accredited CB they mistakenly engaged, they move the audit work to an accredited CB - the CBs get the business sooner or later anyhow.

So it's not cost IMHO, it's lack of potential return on investment in growing their businesses and improving their competitive edge.

Pat

Marc said:

I think the problem is cost and getting timely, accurate data,

Click to expand...

Marc, as I mentioned a number of times, when we discussed the possibility of the ISO database, the IAQG OASIS database is living proof that, not only the task is feasible, doable, but HIGHLY lucrative. I can tell you that with the approximately 16,000 listed sites in OASIS (we have been hovering around that number, for a while now), the OASIS fees generate around US$1.3 Million a year. Imagine if we had a database with 1.5 million entries of the several ISO management system standards. Even when you account that the fees for entry in the database should be equitable, depending on the organization's revenues, the potential income stream is huge and maintenance costs, relatively low.

As I already mentioned, just to have an online database would help in providing confidence to the users of certificates who could find in real-time, 24/7/365 the status of any supplier certification. But, and much more importantly, in my opinion, the added features in OASIS related to the possibility of stakeholder feedback about a certified system is the most important aspect for the checks and balances to keep some level of accountability in the process. I wonder if some CB's don't like the idea of having to answer to some stakeholders and justify why some certificates were awarded and maintained.

The (serious) CB's should not only welcome, but rally behind this database to increase user confidence in their services and the whole concept of accredited system certification. It seems to me that they are being short sighted and looking only at the challenges, such as the data entry and up-keeping, as well as the possibility of clients being poached.... This database would also serve the purpose on an ISO 17021 requirement for CB's to maintain a directory; so, in principle, there should be very little additional work for CB's in terms of keeping the data up to date.

Because I was intimately involved with the discussions that led to the development and continual improvement of the OASIS database since 2003 and saw, first hand, how the database can be used as an agent of betterment in the Aviation, Space & Defense supply chain, I tried hard to promote the concept at a higher, ISO-level.

Maybe IAF will take on the challenge, now that ISO cancelled their project.

As for the idea of The Cove or any other private enterprise creating such a database, I don't believe it would be successful as in the previous cases of World Preferred, Global Exchange, etc...In order to succeed, this database must:

• be mandatory for all IAF-Accredited CB's.
• policed by all IAF signatory AB's
• maintained by the CB's themselves
• fees to be paid by the registrants
• controlled by an IAF Mandatory Document
• etc....

Sidney Vianna said:

<snip> In order to succeed, this database must:

• be mandatory for all IAF-Accredited CB's.
• policed by all IAF signatory AB's
• maintained by the CB's themselves
• fees to be paid by the registrants
• controlled by an IAF Mandatory Document
• etc....

Click to expand...

Exactly - And that isn't realistically going to happen, in my opinion. I won't say it is impossible, but I will say that I think it's improbable.

One other thing - We're talking ISO 9001, not AS9100, etc. How many ISO 9001 certificates and CBs in the world vs. AS9100 certificates and CBs?

Marc said:

One other thing - We're talking ISO 9001, not AS9100, etc. How many ISO 9001 certificates and CBs in the world vs. AS9100 certificates and CBs?

Click to expand...

Actually, we are talking about all ISO Management System Standards that are certifiable. Altogether, in 2013, they exceeded 1.5 Million.