Integrated Management Systems Certification Survey Results

Transcription

1 Integrated Management Systems Certification Survey Results Piotr Kafel Tadeusz Sikora Abstract In the paper, the results were presented of the survey on the integrated management systems (IMS) certification procedures carried out by the Polish certification bodies. The management systems certifying service market was represented. Based on the survey performed, the authors of the paper found that the certifying service market was developed as regards the integrated management systems certification. The Polish certification bodies are widely experienced in performing combined audits. However, they have little experience in certifying IMS as regards the compliance of IMS with the generally accepted and used standard. This is a consequence of the fact that, in Poland, the accreditation of certification system is impossible and no Polish norm is available that contains directives on the IMS certification. Moreover, a disturbing tendency has been identified of equating combined audits with the IMS certification. The Polish institutions certifying management systems publish information on IMT in the form suggesting that may be misinformation on the assessment procedures being actually carried out. 45

2 Introduction Presently, the available management standards are very abundant. The popularity of the standards relating to management started with the undoubted success connected with the publication of the series 9000 of ISO norms, and, next, series thereof. Those systems are the most popular and the most frequently introduced systems worldwide. In 2009, more than one million certificates were issued that confirmed the compliance with the requirements under the ISO 9001 norm and more than 200 thousand certificates confirming the compliance with the requirements under the ISO norm [The ISO Survey, 2009]. Beside the above mentioned systems, other standardized management systems enjoy an increasing popularity; in 2009, more than 84 thousand certificates in total were issued, which proved the compliance with those systems. The following systems can be counted among them: OHSAS 18001: Occupational Health and Safety Management System; ISO/IEC 27001: Information Safety Management System, and Social Accountability of Business: SA Equally widespread are the systems referring to some specific industrial lines, such as: ISO/TS 16949, ISO 13485, and ISO This large number of various systems causes the systems as indicated above to spread to a greater extent from once system to another. Simultaneously, the construction of updated editions of ISO 9001 and ISO norms is so arranged that the integration thereof in any organization introducing them is almost certain, and any attempts to concurrently keep several systems are very difficult [Zeng S.X., Shi J.J., Lou G.X. 2007] [Pheng L.S., Tan J. H. K. 2005] [PN-EN ISO 9001:2009]. The reference literature mentions the many theoretical integration models of standardized management systems, e.g.: [Jonker J., Karapetrovic S. 2004], [Karapetrovic S. 2002], [Wilkinson G., Dale B. G. 1999]. However, there are only a few surveys on the practical aspects linked with the integration of management systems, especially in the sphere of their certification. In this paper, the survey shows how the integration of management systems is perceived by the Polish certifying bodies. Survey Description The survey on the integration of management systems in Polish enterprises was focused on the analysis of information conveyed to their customers and to other parties interested in the certification process. The research was carried out in December The information published on websites of the management systems certifying bodies were analyzed. Also, a review of available descriptions of certification systems in individual certification programmes was performed. Surveyed were the organisations with valid accreditation given by the Polish Centre of Accreditation (PCA) and having credentials that they complied with the requirements under the PN-EN ISO/IEC 17021:2007 [PN-EN ISO/IEC 17021:2007] standard. Pursuant to the directives by 46

3 PCA, the activities connected with the management system certification could be classified on the grounds of the status of their credentials. There are 6 symbols of management system accreditation. To each symbol were assigned relevant documents containing guidelines on how a particular Management System (MS) should be used, the so called reference documents. In Tab. 1, the accreditation symbols currently in use are shown with the major guidelines appertaining to them. Table 1. Symbols of management system accreditation and respective standards appertaining to them. Pos. Accreditation Symbol Name of Programme Reference Documents 1 QMS Quality Management System PN-EN ISO 9001 PN-EN ISO PN-EN ISO EMS Environmental Management System PN-EN ISO EMS Food Safety Management System PN-EN ISO ISMS Information Safety Management System PN ISO/IEC i PN-I BHP Occupational Health and Safety PN-N Management System 6 PEFC Forest Economy and Supply Chain Management System DAC-18 Source: The authors own study based on [DA-02. Zasady 2009] [ Presently, on the Polish market, there are 30 certifying bodies with the Polish accreditation to certify management systems. The EU Parliament and Council enforced a regulation of No. 765/2008, and, pursuant to it, the accreditation system in force, those MS certifying bodies can operate on the home market of any EU member country, which hold credentials issued by foreign certifying bodies [Regulation (EU) No. 765/2008]. Those foreign bodies are omitted in this survey, because there are only a few such bodies and the scope of their activities is limited. From among 30 bodies surveyed, the most (9 bodies) were accredited exclusively for one certification programme, i.e. for Quality Management System. All the organizations survey had the accreditation for this Programme; this fact proved the highest popularity of the quality management system according to the requirements of ISO 9001 standard amidst the available management systems. The quantity of accreditations issued for other certification programmes does also correspond with the popularity thereof among the organizations implementing it. 20 entities have accreditation for the EMS programme, 15 for BHP, 8 for FSMS, 4 for ISMS, and one for PEFC system. 47

4 Fig. 1 Quantity of Accreditation Programmes awarded to Certifying Bodies. Source: The authors' own study In Fig. 1, the quantity of certifying bodies is shown, which have from 1 to 5 accredited certification programmes. Among the certifying bodies, there are 21 organizations that have more than one programme within their scope of accreditation and are entitled to assess at least 2 management systems. 4 certifying bodies have a competence to assess as much as 5 standardized management systems. The certifying bodies holding approval, issued by PCA, of their certifying competence, have the right to perform assessment & certification processes also as regards management systems in the programmes not included in their accreditation. The review of the information contained in websites of the certifying bodies confirms that they run MS certification procedures in this area. Thus, the certifying bodies on the Polish market present, and offer, a really broad range of possibilities of evaluating & certifying different management systems. In the group of available accreditation programmes by PCA, exclusively the programmes that are obtainable deal with the assessment of single standardized management systems. No programme exists that refers to the assessment of integrated management system. The reason of this status quo lies in the unavailability of one officially approved document such as a Polish Law (which would be the best) or any international standard or guideline in force in EU comprising directives on the evaluation of integrated management system. Of course, some requirements covered by individual management systems make the integration of different MS possible; however, from the formal point of view, certifying bodies should not grant certificates for an integrated management system. 48

5 Now, there are directives available that refer to the integration of management systems under norms or other prescriptive documents other than Polish, and it is possible to integrate such systems, or to certify one system, as regards its/their compliance with those norms and/or other prescriptive documents. Those documents are listed in Tab. 2. It is found that the significant barrier for the integration of various management systems is the missing of generally accepted & approved international standard containing directives/guidelines, according to which an IMS could be audited for its compliance with such directives/guidelines; this conclusion is confirmed by other research and studies in this field [Douglas A., Glen D. 2000]. Table 2. Integration Models of Management Systems. Pos. Number Name Country of origin 1 Global SAI. AS/NZS 4581:1999 Management System Integration guidance to business, government and community organizations. Australia: SAI Global; HB 10190:2001 IMS: The framework (Integrated Management Systems Series) Australia New Zealand Great Britain 3 PAS 99 Integrated Management (possibility to certify) 4 NTS (1996) Management Principles for Enhancing Quality of Products and Services, Occupational Health and Safety, and the Environment, Draft Norwegian Standard, Norwegian Technology Standards Institution, Oslo, 5 DS 8001:2005 Management Systems Directives on developing an Integrated Management System Great Britain Norway Denmark 6 UNE 66177:2005 Integración Sistemas de Gestión Spain Source: The authors own study. When integrating management systems, it is necessary to single out both the shared elements and the elements specific for individual sub-systems. The integration may refer to different categories, such as: objects, targets and relations, structures, processes and resources [Bagiński J. 2000]. In the reference literature, there are available various methods to measure the integration degree of managements systems. Those 49

6 methods depend on the approach to integration by the enterprises themselves [Jorgensen T., Remmen A., Mellado M. 2006] [Karapetrovic S., Jonker J. 2003] [Kirkby A. 2002]. The integration level, measured by this degree, always ranges between the zero level, where the individual standardized management systems coexist completely differently from each other, and the level of 100% integration, where all the elements of individual standardized MS operate within one system. Of course, theoretically, those two extreme possibilities are always present; however, in practice, the realistic level of integration will be placed somewhere between the two extremes. In the light of the above information, it is to be concluded that the evaluation and certification of integrated management systems may be approached in two ways (Fig. 2). The first variant is to solely check whether or not the requirements contained in individual, standardized management system are met. The second variant comprises not only checking the compliance with the requirements of individual systems, but, also, checking the degree of integration according to the model assumed. In this second approach, based on a certificate confirming the effectiveness of IMS implemented and in operation, it may be expected that owing to the applied model of integration, the IMS will appear more effective, as a result of synergy, than the individual management systems acting independently. Fig. 2. Variants of Certification of several Management Systems. Source: The authors' own study An entirely different issue is whether or not a given enterprise needs an IMS certification to be performed according to Variant 2. Third party institutions always run an independent and objective assessment of IMS, and, based thereon, a confirmation in the form of certificate is issued to an enterprise that fulfils the necessary requirements. This certificate constitutes a certain value mainly in the enterprise s external com- 50

7 munication since the receivers of the information are customers, suppliers, potential partners, etc. The research into the motives of integrating management systems shows that the requirements demanded by such external entities (as named above) with regard to the integration of management systems are very seldomly a motive of integration1. In the case of implementing and certificating individual systems (certification variant 1), very often, the receivers requirements/demands were the driving force behind such changes [Kafel P., Sikora T. 2004]. The analysis results of information published by certifying bodies holding accreditation for at least 2 MS certification programmes showed the following: the scope of information on the possibilities of integrating management systems and relevant assessments by those institutions varied greatly. The direct reference to the existing possibility to certify an integrated management system was inserted in the information materials of 8 certifying bodies out of the 21 certifying bodies in total. In this group of 8 bodies, two entities pointed out that such assessment was possible to be performed beyond the accreditation or within the scope of accreditation awarded by a foreign institution. In all other cases (13) no information of that type is present. This fact may suggest certifications of IMS (certification variant 2), and not the combined auditing and the assessment of fulfilment of the requirements contained in individual management systems. One of the organizations expressly stated that it performed certifications of IMS within the scope of its accreditation by PCA. Other information on IMS made available by the certifying bodies, refer, in the majority, to informing about the benefits resulting from the integration. This information mainly speaks about the possibilities of cost reduction owing to the integration of management systems. Only one certifying body stresses systemic merits connected with IMS in its information on the benefits from integrating the management systems employed in an enterprise. Presently, combined audits and assessments of at least some integrated elements of the implemented management systems seem to be a common procedure performed by the certifying bodies; this statement is evidenced by, for example, the survey [Bernardo M., Casadesus M., Karapetrovic S., Heras I. 2010]. Conclusions Copyright by Institute of Organization and Managment in Industry ORGMASZ Based on the survey accomplished, and in reference to the certification of integrated management systems, it is possible to conclude that the certifying services market is developed. The Polish certifying bodies are highly experienced in carrying out combined audits. On the other hand, they are little experienced in certifying integrated management systems for compliance with a generally accepted standard. This results from the situation that there is impossible in Poland to accredit such a certification system and there is no Polish standard containing gui- 51

8 delines on the certification of IMS. Additionally, a disturbing tendency is found that the audits combined with the certification of integrated management systems were wrongly considered equivalent. The information on the certification of integrated management systems, published by the bodies certifying management systems, may mislead as regards the assessment processes that are practically performed by such bodies. 52

9 Reference List Copyright by Institute of Organization and Managment in Industry ORGMASZ 1. Bernardo M, Casadesus M, Karapetrovic S., Heras I, An empirical study on the integration of management system audits, Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 2. Douglas A. Glen D., Integrated management systems in small and medium enterprises, Total Quality Management; Jul 2000; 11, 4-6; pg. S Jonker J., Karapetrovic S., Systems thinking for the integration of management systems, Business Process Management Journal 10.6 (2004) 4. Jorgensen T, Remmen A, Mellado M. Integrated management systems three different levels of integration. Journal of Cleaner Production 2006;14(8): Kafel P, Sikora T., Badania motywów wdrażania i certyfikacji systemów zarządzania jakością, Konferencja naukowa nt.: "Towaroznawstwo wobec integracji z Unią Europejską" Red. J. Żuchowski, Radom 2004 r. 6. Kafel P., Znaki jakości wyrobów spożywczych, Zarządzanie Jakością 1/2010 (19) 7. Karapetrovic S., Jonker J. Integration of standardized management systems: searching for a recipe and ingredients. Total Quality Management, 2003;14(4): Karapetrovic S. Strategies for the integration of management systems and standards. TQM Magazine 2002;14(1): Kirkby A. The one-stop shop. Qualityworld; January p Pheng L.S., Tan J.H.K., Integrating ISO 9001 Quality Management System and ISO Environmental Management System for Contractors, Journal of construction engineering and management, November PN-EN ISO 9001:2009 Systemy zarządzania jakością. Wymagania 12. PN-EN ISO/IEC 17021:2007 Ocena zgodności. Wymagania dla jednostek prowadzących auditowanie i certyfikację systemów zarządzania 13. The ISO Survey of Certifications 2009, pobrano z: Wilkinson G, Dale BG. Integrated management systems: an examination of the concept and theory. The TQM Magazine 1999;11(2): Zeng S.X., Shi J.J. Lou G.X., A synergetic model for implementing an integrated management system: an empirical study in China, Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) ROZPORZĄDZENIE PARLAMENTU EUROPEJSKIEGO I RADY (WE) NR 765/2008 z dnia 9 lipca 2008 r. ustanawiające wymagania w zakresie akredytacji i nadzoru rynku odnoszące się do warunków wprowadzania produktów do obrotu i uchylające rozporządzenie (EWG) nr 339/ Bagiński J. Doświadczenia we wdrażaniu zintegrowanych systemów zarządzania, w Zintegrowane systemy zarządzania, pod red.: Sikora T., Kraków