Muir Gray memorably wrote,
All screening programmes do harm; some do good as well, and, of these, some do more good than harm at reasonable cost. The first task of any public health service is to identify beneficial programmes by appraising the evidence. However, evidence of a favourable balance of benefit to harm in a research setting does not guarantee that a similar balance will be reproduced in practice, so screening programmes need to be introduced in a way that allows their quality to be measured and continuously improved.
ISO management accreditation works like a poor quality screening test while claiming to assure quality which it lacks itself. Here’s how it works in a graph:
Do all ISO accreditation programmes do harm? How does it work for you? What’s your evidence? Publish it.