A great deal is written about standards and very little of it is sourced. These articles work clause by clause and name their references: ISO and ISO/TC 176/SC 2 for the state of the standard, the IATF for the automotive sector, the accreditation side for transition periods. Where the evidence runs out — as it does for the still unpublished ISO 9001:2026 transition period — the article says so instead of presenting an estimate as a fact.
SMART is not in the standard, objectives need not be quantified, and the requirement clause 6.2 fails on in audits is almost never the target-setting. What 6.2.1 and 6.2.2 actually ask for — and what the 2026 edition changes.
Read article →Inputs under 9.3.2, outputs under 9.3.3, and the three misconceptions that shape most management reviews. With the ISO/TC 176 auditing guidance that states plainly what the standard never did: a separate meeting is not a requirement.
Read article →The IATF has announced the second edition for mid-2027 and coupled its transition to the ISO 9001 transition. What Stakeholder Communiqué SC-2026-005 actually says and what follows for suppliers.
Read article →Clause-by-clause comparison of ISO 9001:2015 and 2026: quality culture in 5.1.1, risks and opportunities split in 6.1, climate change in 4.2, the new Annex A - sourced, with what it means for audit practice.
Read article →Process audits per VDA 6.3, layered process audits, customer-specific requirements and more frequent certification audits: what IATF 16949 actually adds on top of ISO 9001.
Read article →What ISO 9001:2015 actually requires, with clause references: the ten clauses, the process approach and PDCA placed correctly, maintain versus retain — and why neither an annual management review nor the figure of a million certified organizations survives a look at the text.
Read article →