ISO accreditation claims to make systems good. In fact, it only makes them inspectable. It is another imposition of misguided management that has made working life inefficient and stressful. It treats professionals like schoolchildren on daily report. It is like living out someone else's personality disorder. The EU endorses and, in some cases, enforces it.
Accreditation involves an inspection body in the international "quality" cartel telling employees elsewhere exactly how to do their jobs - the accreditor's own one-size-fits-all "management system". Accreditors have twisted their victims' jobs into collecting exhaustive records for inspectors to quibble about. They've renamed bureaucracy "quality." And increased costs by maybe a third.
Quality is the magic word that is used to close down any debate of the issue. Despite accreditation having nothing to do with quality as any customer would define it. John Seddon has exposed the mil-spec folly of ISO 9000. But ISO management standards for laboratory services are ISO 9000 on steroids.
Professionals submit thoughtlessly to a creeping and flawed argument from the authority that the ISO's enforcer, UKAS, has assumed. The argument is, that because of its protected role in the narrow field of measurement and its use of inspectors, UKAS has a legitimate and verified ability to assure quality by inspection.
A few people are beginning to recognise the expense, waste, and failure-to-deliver of this pseudo-science. That record-keeping is not quality. They are realising the difference between product specifications and sinister standards for behavioural control. The importance of value is being rediscovered. The time has come to rip away the cloak of dreariness that has disguised this parasitic system for so long. Many people working under this regime are waiting to have their instinctive suspicions about it confirmed.
This blog investigates the background and effects of the accreditation cult which has been neither properly tested nor proven. Its aim is to prompt readers to expose the results of the error in their own fields of professional expertise. They will see that professional revalidation, Continuing Professional Development and recording-training-as-a-proxy-for-measuring-productivity spring from a similar mindset - the presumption that professional incompetence is normal and that collecting records can correct it.
Will you read on from the oldest posts at the bottom of this blog or continue to suffer the cartel's expansion?
ISOwatch 