ViewPoint Espresso Collection – Capturing value from the new ISO requirements # 2 – September 2018 - Understanding the needs and expectations of interested parties
1
DNV GL ©
SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER
Setting the Scene
ISO (International Organization for Standardization) released the new version of the ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 standards in 2015 and more recently the ISO 45001.
2
DNV GL Š
September 2018 is when the transition period for these two schemes ended and all companies had to be aligned with the new requirements in ISO 9001 and ISO 14001.
In 2015 we surveyed our customers before they started their journey towards the transition to the new standards. For each of the most relevant new requirements, we asked how they will implement and plan to be compliant to the new requirement.
Today in 2018, we are repeating our investigation limited to those companies that have already completed the adoption of the new standard version, with the aim of understanding: â–Ş How they have actually met and satisfied the specific standard requirements in comparison with what they planned to do 3 years ago.
â–Ş What kind of benefits and value the new requirement created or is expected to create for the company.
ISO Requirements in Focus We will apply the same investigation format to the following set of new ISO requirements, which we consider the most relevant within the wider full set of new requirements brought in by ISO in the new Standard version:
4.1 – Understanding the organisation and its context 4.2 – Understanding the needs and expectations of interested parties 5.1 – Leadership and commitment 6.1 – Actions to address risks and opportunities 7.4 - Communication The requirement in focus is 4.2 – Understanding the needs and expectations of interested parties: “The organization shall determine interested parties relevant to the management system and their requirements. (9K). The organization shall monitor and review the information about the interested parties and relevant requirements / (14K). The organization shall determine which needs and expectations become its compliance obligations.”
3
DNV GL ©
Question 1 – Means for meeting the requirement How have you met the requirement (4.2) in your organisation? Mark initiatives that your organisation has implemented (multiple answers are allowed) ▪ The top 3 means adopted by companies reflect what was in their plans almost 3 years ago 78%
By determining external and internal interested parties
By determining all relevant requirements from interested parties
50%
By reviewing interested parties and their requirements on a regular basis
43%
By documenting the relevant interested parties and their requirements
40%
By having a documented process for mapping interested parties and their relevant requirements
27%
By embedding the relevant views and requirements of interested parties in your decision-making process
24%
Proactively engaging interested parties to understand their requirements
24% 18%
By determining only legal requirements By producing a ”materiality matrix” for understanding what requirements are most material
16% 11%
By determining external interested parties only Other initiatives
Don't know
4% 1%
▪ Some of the means are actually used more than what was previously expected by companies: – Determining interested parties: +30% – Determining their requirements: +11% – Documenting the result of the process: +10%
– Review on regular basis: +8% ▪ Maturity has increased in companies proven by the higher importance of documenting and repetition of the process over time to create sustainable results. ▪ Little variation between Quality and Environment, but companies with a certified EMS stand out in 3 areas: – Legal requirements (26% vs. 17%) – Having a documented process (33% vs. 25%) – Using the Materiality Matrix approach (23% vs. 15%) ▪ As could be expected, the number of “Don’t know” responses has decreased (from 12% to 1%)
4
DNV GL ©
Question 2 – Benefits from implementing the requirement Please rate how much the new requirement (4.2) contributes, or will contribute, to the achievement of the listed possible benefits. Some of the listed general benefits might not be relevant or applicable to the specific requirement (4.2) in focus in this Espresso survey 1 No contribution at all
1,0
2 Low contribution
2,0
3,0
2,5
Improved financial results Advantages with tax, banks or insurance companies
3 Moderate contribution
3,1
2,8
Improving public image
2,8
– Improved commitment and engagement from top management
2,9
Ability to meet legal requirements
3,2
Customer satisfaction/meet customer needs
2,6 3,1
Identification/management of risks
3,0
Top management commitment & engagement Enhanced employees engagement Improved communication with stakeholders Improvement in management of suppliers
5
DNV GL ©
2,7 2,8 2,7
– Achievement of strategic objectives – Identification of risks
2,7
Providing a competitive advantage
Better relations with relevant authorities
4,0
▪ The adoption of this requirement led to positive contribution (≥ 3) and hence generation of value, for: – Ability to meet customer requirement/improved CS
2,0
Achievement of strategic objectives Creation of new market opportunities
4 High contribution
▪ Some variations between Quality and Environment: – Companies with a certified EMS see this as an additional support to meet legal requirements, achieve advantages with tax/insurances/banks, improve public image, as well as improve the relation with relevant authorities
▪ Due to the requirement’s nature, benefits related to financial and market nature do not rank high
Question 2 – Benefits, overall view (cont’d) The chart below shows the contribution of each of the 5 requirements in focus to the list of identified benefits. The chart will be progressively updated when a new requirement is analysed. When all 5 requirements will be investigated, the chart will be complete
Relevant benefit (≥3) Benefits
4.1 – Understanding the organisation and its context
4.2 – Understanding the needs and expectations of interested parties
Improved financial results Advantages with tax/banks/insurance Achievement of strategic objectives Creation of new market opportunities Providing a competitive advantage Improving public image Ability to meet legal requirements Customer satisfaction/meet customer needs Better relations with authorities Identification/management of risks
Top management commitment & engagement Enhanced employee engagement Improved communication with stakeholders Improvement in management of suppliers
6
DNV GL ©
5.1 – Leadership and commitment
6.1 – Actions to address risks and opportunities
7.4 Communication
Insights from auditing management systems The chart below shows a complementary picture to the survey results. It shows statistics from Lumina™, based on audit findings by DNV GL. See where the shoe pinches for companies in being compliant to the new requirements
30% % of companies with non-conformities (ISO 9K)
% of companies with non-conformities (ISO 14K)
% of companies with non-severe findings (ISO 9K)
% of companies with non-severe findings (ISO 14K)
▪ The data shows the percentage of companies where the audit (ISO 9001:2015 or ISO 14001:2015) resulted in one or more findings in the requirements in focus in this Espresso collection
20% 16%
10%
11% 11%
10% 7%
3%
17%
11%
7%
4%
5%
6%
0% 4.1 – Understanding the organisation and its context
4.2 – Understanding the needs and expectations of interested parties
5.1 – Leadership and commitment
6.1 – Actions to address risks and opportunities
7.4 Communication
▪ Requirement 4.2 seems to be a bit more challenging for companies with 16% (17% for Environment) of them experiencing at least one finding. In 5 companies (6 for Environment) out of 100, the finding is a non-conformity. ▪ Lumina™ is the DNV GL performance benchmarking tool for Management System certification; to learn more about Lumina ™, visit www.dnvgl.com/lumina
Statistics based on more than 30,000 companies audited worldwide Standard: ISO 9001 and 14001 Management Systems (2015 version) Time frame: Jan 2015 – Sept 2018 Industry Sector: All Non-conformities include CAT1 and CAT2 type of NC; non-severe findings include Observations and Opportunities for improvement
7
DNV GL ©
Methodology and Sample
September
2018
This Espresso survey was conducted in September 2018.
547
It involved 547 professionals in companies across different industries in Europe, North America, Central & South America and Asia.
▪ The sample consists of customers of DNV GL – Business Assurance and does not claim to be statistically representative of companies worldwide. ▪ The questionnaire was administered using the CAWI (Computer Assisted Web Interviewing) methodology.
8
DNV GL ©
Thank You!
Want to access the results from other ViewPoint surveys? Read more here Not yet a Viewpoint member and want to join? Click here Interested in benchmarking the performance of your company Management System? Learn more here
www.dnvgl.com
SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER
9
DNV GL ©
The trademarks DNV GL®, DNV®, the Horizon Graphic and Det Norske Veritas® are the properties of companies in the Det Norske Veritas group. All rights reserved.