Tuesday, August 31, 2010

SUMMARY OF CHANGES TO ISO 14001:2004

SUMMARY OF CHANGES TO ISO 14001:2004

ISO 14001:2004 aims to clarify the 1996 edition and align it more closely with the ISO 9001:2000 standard. Some clauses have not been modified for content but have been rewritten to align ISO 14001:2004 with the format, wording, and layout of ISO 9001:2000 and to enhance the compatibility between the two standards.

References in Annex A of the standard are aligned with the numbering in the standard for ease of use. Annex B of the standard identifies similarities and associations between ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 14001:2004.

An important change in wording throughout the revised standard appears in requirements that previously stated that an organisation shall “establish and maintain”; these have now been changed to “establish,implement and maintain”.

Throughout the standard the word “personnel” in the original standard is replaced with “persons working for or on behalf of the organisation” in the revised standard. This is included to ensure that external contractors and applicable suppliers are included under the requirements of certain clauses.

In developing, implementing and maintaining the organisation’s EMS, significant environmental aspects, applicable legal requirements and other requirements to which the organisation subscribes must be considered, and management must ensure the availability of resources.

There are additional paragraphs in the introduction, which generally cover:

• the aim of the ISO 14001:2004 standard is to enhance compatibility with ISO 9001:2000;

• alignment is improved between clause references and supporting Annexes. For example, 4.3.3 and A.3.3 both deal with objectives, targets and programme(s), and 4.5.5 and A.5.5 both deal with internal audit;

• an explanation of the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) model used in ISO 9001:2000;

• the use of the process approach is promoted in alignment with ISO 9001:2000;

• possible alignment and integration with other management systems is reviewed.

Change In ISO 14001:2004 – Documentation

Change In ISO 14001:2004 – Documentation

This clause has been updated to align it with ISO 19001:2004, but has not changed in intent. The listed EMS documentation now includes:

• the environmental policy,

• objectives and targets,

• a description of the scope of the EMS,

• a description of the main elements of the EMS and their interaction and reference to related documents, documents and records

• required by the standard, • documents and records determined by the organisation as necessary to ensure the effective planning, operation and control of processes that relate to the significant environmental aspects.

Formatting changes help align Clause 4.4.5 of ISO 14001:2004 with ISO 9001:2000. An additional clarification has been made to define records as a special type of document requiring control under Clause 4.5.4. A new addition to the requirements aims to ensure documents of external origin, (i.e. MSDS, permits) that are necessary to the system, are identified and their distribution is controlled.

Formatting changes help align Clause 4.4.5 of ISO 14001:2004 with ISO 9001:2000. An additional clarification has been made to define records as a special type of document requiring control under Clause 4.5.4. A new addition to the requirements aims to ensure documents of external origin, (i.e. MSDS, permits) that are necessary to the system, are identified and their distribution is controlled.

The revised standard requires documents required by the EMS and the standard to be controlled documents.

Note that “document” is included in the definitions, and includes its supporting medium which can be paper, magnetic, electronic or optical computer disc, photograph or master sample, or a combination thereof.

ISO 14001:2004 Evaluation of compliance


ISO 14001:2004 Evaluation of compliance

This clause has been separated from 4.5.1 and includes two sub-clauses, as well as clarification and an addition to the ISO 14001:1996 standard. Included in Clause 4.5.1 of ISO 14001:1996 was a requirement for the organisation to periodically evaluate compliance with relevant (now applicable) environmental legislation and regulations. This requirement has been retained in Clause 4.5.2.1 of the revised standard. In Clause 4.5.2.2, ISO 14001:2004 includes evaluation of compliance with other requirements to which the organisation subscribes, which was not specifically required by ISO 14001:1996. This clarification also includes a requirement for records of periodic evaluations of compliance to be kept.

The UK-based Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) has published an opinion that this means that compliance against each and every piece of legislation / regulation relating to an organisation’s environmental aspects will need to be evaluated before it can be considered to be in conformity with ISO 14001: 2004; it will not be acceptable for organisations to claim that the periodic evaluation will be covered by their internal EMS audit program at some future date.

This has always been one of the most difficult issues in ISO 14001:2004, and organisations will need to review and revise their compliance procedures to ensure that they meet these new requirements.

KEY CONSIDERATIONS IN IMPLEMENTING ISO 9001 IN SMEs

KEY CONSIDERATIONS IN IMPLEMENTING ISO 9001 IN SMEs

There are many issues that must be addressed in moving the QMS from the initial state to the desired state. For example, all organizations implementing ISO 9001 will need to consider the unique culture within the organization, its size, and the resources available. Beyond those widely discussed points, three issues that merit particular attention are (1) consideration of the QMS as a parallel function, (2) training, and (3) auditing. Key points associated with these issues are discussed below.

Consideration of QMS as Parallel Function

In the case of all of the transitions depicted, real benefits from the QMS are more likely to be experienced if the QMS is implemented directly into the core structure of the organization. SMEs must be cautious against establishing a QMS that is run separately in parallel to its other systems. In SMEs, the parallel subsystem most commonly exhibits itself as a separate Quality Assurance, or in some cases, ISO 9001department. Possible reasons for this may include the existence of rigid departmental boundaries in some SMEs or overemphasis on core activities. As Yauch and Steudel [10] note, SMEs tend to focus their attention on “…necessary routine activities (such as sales, production, shipping, etc.) rather than activities aimed at improving processes or systems.” If a SME insists on establishing a separate quality department, its level of effectiveness can be increased by embedding the QMS in widely-used organizational systems where practical. The integration is largely a function of how well the QMS manages to share information with other subsystems and its ability to align with the policies, norms, goals, and values in place throughout the organization.

Training

In SMEs, training and staff development is more likely to be ad hoc and small scale because of modest human and financial resources and the absence of a specific training budget. To prevent the problems arising from lack of education and training, two things must be done:

1. Education of Top Management: The centralization of decision-making processes within many SMEs means that the management can either be the main stumbling block to change or the main catalyst for change. Therefore, any approach to ISO 9001 implementation must involve considerable education for the top management of the organization to create awareness and understanding of the implementation process as a change initiative. Implementing a fully functional and documented QMS requires motivation by top management to appreciate, achieve, and implement the necessary measures to meet the standards’ criteria.

2. Education and Training of Employees: SMEs are often under pressure to quickly gain ISO 9001registration. Meeting the requirements of the standard in a short period of time can prove a formidable obstacle for a small company. Since most SMEs do not possess the needed expertise internally, they may be inclined to hire external experts to provide the necessary technical expertise and manpower. However, having a functioning and documented QMS requires more than that. It requires ensuring that all employees in the organization clearly know what is expected of them and how they can contribute to the attainment of their organizations’ goals. This will likely require the preparation and implementation of a training plan tailored specifically to the unique characteristics and maturity level of the SME.

Auditing

As emphasized throughout the paper, a QMS is not going to produce the expected results unless it is fully functional. While auditing must therefore verify the existence of the necessary documentation, it must also focus on the functionality of the QMS. The measurement of the functionality and the qualitative and financial impacts of a QMS have been the subject of several studies, including Kaynak [11]. Among the categories used to measure functionality and performance improvement, two are particularly noteworthy for our purposes: management commitment and employee involvement. A QMS cannot be functional in the absence of those two characteristics. Therefore, as a minimum, internal and external auditors should continually verify top management’s commitment to increased company-wide quality awareness and improvement in addition to employee involvement in the design, implementation, operation, and improvement of quality related processes and procedures.