TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: QUESTION: ISO compliance & archived documents From:Smokey Lynne L Bare <slbare -at- JUNO -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 28 Oct 1997 18:11:48 -0500
After having my paws 'burned' by ISO auditors at a planning meeting for
using the wrong word (certified), I will share with you what I was told
by three of the 'big' 6 from a local conference.
If someone says they are certified they are incorrect! The correct word
is 'REGISTERED'. A company can be one of two levels.
First, your documentation can be 'compliant', or in other words, it meets
the checklist, but the firm has decided not to pay for an external
(outside source) audit. Most companies today going forward do try to be
compliant in their 'new' documentation material. This will prepare them
for their client, who is ISO Registered and deals ONLY with ISO
Registered vendors. Now, you call in the external auditors at a tune of
$15,000 to 30,000. That is why most companies are going with compliancy
until the last minute.
Second, if the external ISO auditor gives you passing marks, you become
officially 'REGISTERED', and receive a certificate of REGISTRY. It is
much like a trademark symbol.
We were told for those in the British market place, it is referred to as
'cer-tif-i-kate-tid', unlike the American pronunciation for certificate
(sorry Mikey). The auditors cautioned the CIOs and CEOs to be careful of
outside TC vendors, who used this incorrect terminology when describing
that they could do ISO doc work for them. Their thinking was that if the
TCs used 'certified', they did not really understand the processes
involved.
That was one conference I learned a very good lesson, and so I thought I
would pass this on to the TCs, who are interested in working in the
field, as it was passed on to me.