BillLockwood 0 #1 December 27, 2005 Why are some manufactures like Sun Path, Relative Workshop and Performance Designs ISO certified and others are not? What is the advantage of this? Should you consider this when buying? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #2 December 27, 2005 My guess: military contracts. I don't think it's a decision maker because an uncertified company can have just as good a quality system, but I think it can factor into one's decision. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
teason 0 #3 December 27, 2005 ISO is a rating used in manufacturing. To over simplify ISO, it standardizes the steps used in the production of a given item and allows better trouble shooting of problems. For example, if you have 10 people building containers and each container involves 10 steps and each person does each step differently, if you had a problem, you have to examine all 100 steps. With standardization, you would only have to examine 10 steps. Most skydiving manufacturers will have standardized ways of producing thier product as there are regulations and minimums which must be achieved (TSO) I've been to manufacturers that do not have ISO but would pass the audit easily. The ISO certification just means they pay for regular audits. It also assures the customer of thier commitment to standardization and therefore quality. In a small manufacturing environment like skydiving equipment it probably isn't as important as large scale manufacturing with 100s of employees. That can become a real headache!I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #4 December 28, 2005 QuoteShould you consider this when buying? No. Most of the ISO certified gear manufacturers only have the certification because the military started to favor companies that had it. It means pretty much nothing in terms of quality to the average consumer.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billbooth 10 #5 December 29, 2005 Gee! I'm glad to know I just spent nearly $100,000 0n NOTHING. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
teason 0 #6 December 29, 2005 I hope that was on audits and not consulting. Consulting - If you're not part of the solution there's good money to be made by prolonging the problem!I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
divnswoop 0 #7 December 29, 2005 QuoteGee! I'm glad to know I just spent nearly $100,000 0n NOTHING. That's alright Bill....maybe one day you will figure things out! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nitrox100 0 #8 December 29, 2005 QuoteGee! I'm glad to know I just spent nearly $100,000 0n NOTHING. Been there, done that several times. A total waste. Most American companies have jumped through hoops for ISO in order to get mil/gov/euro contracts. Now the scam for this decade is the Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) audit process. From a skydiving perspective I am happy with the FAA TSO certification. I don't need an ISO compliance certificate to ensure that the processes to get the TSO are documented and repeatable. (I know mains do not require a TSO.) After a while we spend so much time on paperwork that no real work gets done. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billbooth 10 #9 December 29, 2005 We spent the money for two reasons: 1. In theory, it cuts manufacturing errors, thus saving re-manufacturing costs. I'll let you know how that works out in practice in a couple of years. 2. If you want to sell to government, you've got to do it. As much as I hate paperwork, it still hurt to spent the money. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggermick 7 #10 December 29, 2005 QuoteWe spent the money for two reasons: 1. In theory, it cuts manufacturing errors, thus saving re-manufacturing costs. I'll let you know how that works out in practice in a couple of years. 2. If you want to sell to government, you've got to do it. As much as I hate paperwork, it still hurt to spent the money. OOOOHH Feel ya on that one Bill!!! Mick. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
teason 0 #11 December 29, 2005 Some ISO consultants are also just plain shifty. I've seen one company take two years to ISO. They fired the consultant and the next one had it done in just a couple of months.I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #12 December 30, 2005 QuoteGee! I'm glad to know I just spent nearly $100,000 0n NOTHING. I wouldn't say that. Your company (RWS) and sister companies (CPS) of your have almost cornered the US military market. It's getting harder and harder for a gear dealer to lock down a military contract like they used to because the ISO question comes up. The original poster wanted to know if it made a differenct o him (the average single purchace consumer) and I still say no. There are plenty of non-ISO certified manufacturers out there that make top quality equipment. There is altleast one ISO certified manufacturer I wouldn't buy from.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #13 December 30, 2005 I hope 100% of that cost is reflected in military sales and none of it is imposed on your civillian prices. I am not all that familliar with ISO, but my feeling is that it will inhibit innovation as well as mistakes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #14 December 31, 2005 >It means pretty much nothing in terms of quality to the average consumer. Depends on the company. I've been at several companies, making consumer products, that had a lot of problems that an ISO 9000 audit would have caught. We've seen the problems the lack of a repeatable process can cause dozens of times. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mbondvegas 0 #15 August 13, 2006 Quote Been there, done that several times. A total waste. Most American companies have jumped through hoops for ISO in order to get mil/gov/euro contracts. Now the scam for this decade is the Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) audit process. Hey Hey now...SOX consulting/auditing is not a scam...that's how a I pay for my skydives!! Seriously, I think that ISO from a manufacturing perspective makes good sense. SOX would be the parallel in the accounting world and has improved the quality of financial reporting (despite some of the ridiculous interpretations and wild costs). While responsible manufacturers (or public companies) might do all that is required to comply with ISO 9000 (or SOX404) without having the certification, the certification shows a commitment to quality and I think customers (or investors) in the know will value that. Hey Bill, I think the $100K will pay off...but you probably already figured that out before you spent it. And hey $100K is a bargain compared to SOX cost...- - - I am not afraid of tomorrow, for I have seen yesterday and I love today. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Cloudi 0 #16 August 13, 2006 God forbid skydivers "might" have to pay a little more for something that helps ensure they get a consistant, quality product... The purpose of an ISO certification is to produce a product over and over in the same way, every time. It prohibits manufacturers from cutting corners and/or allowing variences in their procedures. This does not mean an end to inginuity. If something great is developed that can benefit the process/product/production, it will be incorporated into the ISO (meaning, that will become the new standard the company must adhere to). It only means that the procedures remain consistant. Kim Watch as I attempt, with no slight of hand, to apply logic and reason. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
Cloudi 0 #16 August 13, 2006 God forbid skydivers "might" have to pay a little more for something that helps ensure they get a consistant, quality product... The purpose of an ISO certification is to produce a product over and over in the same way, every time. It prohibits manufacturers from cutting corners and/or allowing variences in their procedures. This does not mean an end to inginuity. If something great is developed that can benefit the process/product/production, it will be incorporated into the ISO (meaning, that will become the new standard the company must adhere to). It only means that the procedures remain consistant. Kim Watch as I attempt, with no slight of hand, to apply logic and reason. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
