The ISO Show

Watch the Podcast Video on our YouTube Channel We are hitting a crunch point in regard to keeping to the 1.5°C limit as set out in the Paris Agreement. It's going to take a collective effort to reduce the most catastrophic impacts of climate change, which is exactly why we're seeing an increase in legislation and regulations that call for tangible evidence of sustainability efforts to combat the rise in greenwashing. If you're looking for guidance on sustainability transparency, today's guest has an initiative that can help. In this episode Mel is joined by Charlie Martin, CEO and Founder of The Anti-Greenwash Charter, to discuss how their charter promotes transparency and accountability for sustainability claims, and how it can help consumers to identify credible carbon claims. You'll learn · What is The Anti-Greenwash Charter · How can the Charter ensure credible carbon claims? · What are the biggest challenges businesses face in measuring their carbon footprint? · How can The Anti-Greenwash Charter help consumers to spot credible carbon claims? · What role do governments and regulatory bodies play in combatting greenwashing? Resources · Anti-Greenwash Charter · Green Claims Policy Template · Carbonology In this episode, we talk about: [00:30] Episode Summary – Charlie Martin joins Mel to discuss how The Anti-Greenwash Charter can help promote accountability and transparency in sustainability claims, and how it can help consumers identify credible carbon claims. [01:50] What inspired the creation of The Anti-Greenwash Charter?: Charlie used to run an agency called Gusta, which was a UK based business that worked on sustainability communication for organisations in the built environment. His focused shifted when the Competitions and Markets authority in the UK published their Green Claims Code alongside research which found that 40% of sustainability-related messaging online was misleading. At the same time, they had 2 very proactive clients (1 of which was going through B Corp certification) that highlighted that the CMA had not named the built environment as one of the affected sectors. They pointed out that the built environment accounts for 40% of all emissions, so were likely to be targeted by such regulations next. They asked to run a campaign that would Increase confidence both internally within their sectors and externally in their sustainability messaging. It was decided that a publicly available document would be the best way forward to proactively disclose their carbon reduction related activities. Other ideas were added for an editorial process to include legal, sustainability and marketing feedback ahead of publishing. Essentially, the origins are rooted in the notion of a green claims policy, which developed into a more robust accreditation signatory. [06:30] How does Charlie define Greenwashing?: Charlie defines greenwashing as "overstating or misleading stakeholders regarding the environmental credentials of an organization, service, or product. Charlie explains that there are two types of greenwashing: direct and indirect. Direct greenwashing involves making false claims about a product's environmental benefits, while indirect greenwashing involves making true claims that are irrelevant or misleading. [08:00] What are the key principles of the charter, and how do you ensure adherence among signatories?: The 4 key principles are: · Accountability · Honesty · Fairness · Transparency If you'd like to know more about each principle in more detail, visit The Anti-Greenwash Charter website. Taking a look at transparency in more detail, it's not just about sharing all the best sustainability related news for your business, it's about being willing and upfront with areas where you're not as strong. One keyway they ensure signatories adhere to this principle involves publicly displacing their green claims policies. The first section of every policy is 'where can we improve?' – they specify this as there isn't a company that is 100% environmentally sustainable, and businesses need to be honest about this if they want to improve. [12:15] What are Charlie's thoughts on the current state of Net Zero claims? There are some promising developments, such as the upcoming Green Claims Directive, which has more requirements set around how people make claims and being held accountable for those. It's challenging for everyone to navigate, and the big thing here to remember is that everyone is clumsy when it comes to Net Zero. Businesses are trying their best, but when getting deep into the topic of sustainability, it becomes clear how broad it truly is. Ultimately, people have to be okay with getting things wrong. Some people see setting ambitious targets as dangerous, but if we don't push for them, change is going to happen at a snails pace. There is a need for credible, substantiated plans that are in-line with best practice, but we need to be careful to not go too far in that direction to ensure that it helps rather than hinders sustainability efforts. Innovation should be encouraged and not punished if mistakes are made or certain really ambitious targets aren't met within a certain timeframe. Mel highlights that Standards such as ISO 14064 are great frameworks to guide businesses in measuring their carbon footprint, with guidance that encourages independent third party verification for further transparency. [15:40] The Green Claims Directive and Transparency – Charlie highlights that the Green Claims Directive identifies independent third party verification as a mandatory requirement of claims made before they're disclosed publicly. As this is also something that The Anti-Greenwash Charter encourages, signatories are already ahead of the curve. [17:10] What are the biggest challenges that companies are facing in accurately measuring their carbon footprint and how does the Charter help to address these challenges? The main challenge is accurately measuring their carbon footprint, and the charter acts as a signpost with referral partners who can assist with this aspect of their sustainability journey. Another challenge is communication. So you've got your substantiated claims and green credentials, but how do you go about communicating that? That's one of the crucial elements that The Anti-Greenwash Charter can help with. As mentioned earlier, they can help verify a publicly available green claims policy, which is a huge step towards credible carbon claims. If you'd like an example of this, you can download Anti-Greenwash Charters' green claims policy template from their website – which provides a step-by-step guide on producing one of your own. [20:50] What are the broader benefits for companies that adopt a transparent and credible green claim? Charlie explains that signatories have used their status as a signatory for their Charter on tender frameworks, and won due to that fact. Another benefit is the Charters' credibility, which gives external stakeholders confidence that a business is doing what they claim to be doing. They also offer anti-greenwashing awareness training, which gives those within the business the tools and techniques that can be utilised in any published content to ensure they aren't making any greenwashing claims. [22:25] The negative effects of greenwashing on well meaning businesses: Charlie and Mel both highlight the sad reality that many businesses would prefer to simply not make any green initiatives or claims public for fear that if they are not done 100% successfully then there's a chance for reputational damage. The need for robust sustainability frameworks that build confidence is clear. Due diligence is important, and so is the need to allow room for mistakes to happen, so long as businesses take the necessary steps to fix them and keep continually improving. [27:15] What role does Charlie see governments and regulatory bodies playing in combating greenwashing, and what policy changes would he like to see? – The EU Green Claims Directive is currently best in class as it requires businesses to look at the consequences of their impact on the environment, in addition to the requirement for independent verification to back up any claims made. Other regulations here in the UK, like the Green Claims Code, is weaker in comparison. It was watered down through negotiation into a more voluntary scheme. For us here in the UK, we really do need to align with Europe, as their regulations are a lot more robust and offer a tangible path towards a united greener future. There are other benefits, as Mel highlights from her Masters research, there is compelling evidence that a company's value increases by an average of 10% if their carbon claims are independently verified. [32:35] What are Charlie's aspirations for The Anti-Greenwash Charter? And what are his hopes for the future of credible carbon claims? – They're really keen to become a multinational signatory, which is already showing promise as they've had interest from the US and Australia. Charlie envisions a future where businesses publish a green claims policy regardless of if it's mandated by legislation. This is so we can build confidence in green claims being made and be assured that people are doing what they say they're doing. To help with credibility and transparency, The Anti-Greenwash Charter has been incorporated as a not-for-profit organisation. Charlie wants to reaffirm that they started this to ultimately reduce the impact businesses make on the planet, and they are fully committed to this goal. If you'd like to learn more about The Anti-Greenwash Charter, visit their website! If you'd like any assistance with carbon standards, get in touch with Carbonology, they'd be happy to help! We'd love to hear your views and comments about the ISO Show, here's how: ● Share the ISO Show on Twitter or Linkedin ● Leave an honest review on iTunes or Soundcloud. Your ratings and reviews really help and we read each one. Subscribe to keep up-to-date with our latest episodes: Stitcher | Spotify | YouTube |iTunes | Soundcloud | Mailing List

ISO Standards have been at the forefront of creating a unified approach to various aspects of sustainability, ensuring businesses have a robust framework to both manage and reduce their environmental impact. However, there are a lot of different sustainability Standards that cover specific areas of sustainability, or only apply to certain sectors. Each come with their own pros and cons, making it tricky to pick the best fit for you. In this episode Steph Churchman introduces four of the leading sustainability focused ISO Standards and explains the benefits and disadvantages of each to help you decide which could be the best fit for your business. You'll learn · Learn about our upcoming ESG Workshop · What is ISO 14001? · What are the pros and cons of ISO 14001? · What is ISO 50001? · What are the pros and cons of ISO 50001? · What is ISO 20400? · What are the pros and cons of ISO 20400? · What is ISO 14064? · What are the pros and cons of ISO 14064? Resources · Isologyhub · Register for our ESG Workshop (26th March 2025) In this episode, we talk about: [02:05] Episode Summary – Steph discusses the leading sustainability ISO Standards, and explains the advantages and disadvantages of each. [02:45] ESG Workshop: On the 26th March 2025 we'll be explaining how ISO Standards directly support ESG compliance, and we're including the opportunity to participate in 1 of 3 interactive sessions that tackle things like completing a materiality assessment, a balance scorecard and learning more about the current mandatory ESG reporting requirements. Register your place here. [03:15] What is ISO 14001?: ISO 14001 is the Standard for Environmental Management. Published back in 1996, this Standard is one of the staples in the ISO world. Its main purpose is to establish and implement an effective environmental management system (EMS), with the primary goal of helping organizations to minimize their environmental impact and achieve sustainability objectives. It sets out general requirements for: · Pollution control · Reduction of your impact on the environment · And compliance to relevant legislation It is also due for a revision soon, with the latest version expected to include further considerations for changes to available technology, more emphasis on product life-cycle and supply chain issues and further guidance on integrating environmental issues into your strategic planning. [04:35] What are the benefits of ISO 14001?: Reducing environmental impact: By identifying and controlling environmental aspects, organizations can minimize pollution, reduce waste, and conserve resources. Improved compliance: ISO 14001 helps organizations comply with environmental regulations and legal requirements, such as the environment Act 2021, reducing the risk of fines and penalties. Improved efficiency: ISO 14001 helps to tighten production processes, leading to better efficiency and reduction in the risk of incidents. It also removes uncertainty by managing disruption and waste and helps to clarify staff responsibility. Enhanced reputation: Demonstrating a commitment to environmental responsibility can enhance your reputation and brand image, attracting environmentally conscious customers and stakeholders. Cost savings: Implementing an EMS can lead to cost savings through improved resource efficiency, reduced waste disposal costs, and lower energy consumption. Businesses can also benefit from reduced insurance costs by demonstrating better risk management. Increased competitiveness: ISO 14001 certification can give organizations a competitive advantage in the marketplace, particularly in sectors where environmental performance is a key consideration. [06:45] What are the disadvantages of ISO 14001? Initial costs: Implementing an EMS requires an initial investment in resources, including training, documentation, potentially hiring consultants, and if you're going for certification, that will incur its own costs from a certification body too. Ongoing maintenance: Maintaining an EMS requires ongoing effort and resources to ensure compliance with the standard and continuous improvement. Potential for bureaucracy: If not implemented effectively, an EMS can become cumbersome, hindering operational efficiency. Limited scope: ISO 14001 focuses primarily on environmental aspects within an organization's direct control, and may not address broader environmental impacts or social responsibility concerns – which is where other Standards can fill the gap. [08:05] What is ISO 50001? – ISO 50001 is an internationally recognized standard that provides a framework for organizations to establish, implement, and maintain an Energy Management System (EnMS). The primary goal is to help organizations improve energy performance, including reducing energy consumption, increasing energy efficiency, and using energy more effectively. [08:40] What are the benefits of ISO 50001? Reduced energy costs: By identifying and addressing energy inefficiencies, you can significantly reduce your energy bills. We had great success with this when we worked closely with a branch of the NHS, where their initial energy spend was around £2.8 million which was reduced by £1 million as a result of implementing ISO 50001. Improved energy performance: ISO 50001 helps organizations establish baselines, set targets, and track progress in improving energy performance. This is vital as you can't hope to reduce what you can't measure. Enhanced environmental performance: Reduced energy consumption leads to lower greenhouse gas emissions and a reduced environmental impact. Often times, energy usage is the largest impact many organisations have on the environment, especially for those who may only have an office or warehouse. Increased competitiveness: Demonstrating a commitment to energy efficiency can enhance an organization's reputation and attract environmentally conscious customers and stakeholders. Improved operational efficiency: An energy management system can lead to improved operational efficiency through better resource management and reduced waste. [10:55] What are the disadvantages of ISO 50001? Initial investment: Implementing an EnMS requires an initial investment in resources, including training, data collection, and possible help from a consultancy. Limited Guidance: Calculating your energy usage can be complicated, especially if you're spread across multiple sites and countries. In cases where you're renting space, you may face difficulties obtaining the information needed, then on top of that is the actual calculation which may involve conversion factors if you've got international sites in scope. Resistance to change: Implementing changes to energy-using processes can sometimes meet with resistance from employees. A lot of practices will require a change in habits, such as turning off and unplugging all devices when leaving an office, or more frequent checks on equipment to ensure it's running optimally. Limited scope: ISO 50001 focuses primarily on energy performance within an organization's direct control and may not address broader energy-related issues or the entire supply chain – which includes its own energy consumption considerations. [12:30] What is ISO 20400? – ISO 20400 is an internationally recognized standard that provides guidance on sustainable procurement. It helps organizations integrate sustainability considerations into their procurement processes, ensuring that environmental, social, and economic factors are taken into account when making purchasing decisions. This Standard differs from the others as it's not a certifiable Standard. It's a guidance document that you can align with. For those of you looking into ESG schemes, this Standard is often citied as a key tool to help get you in the right place for scoring. In addition, for those of you looking into more comprehensive carbon reporting, Supply chains are often one of the biggest sources of emissions. Alignment with that Standard will allow you to take a good hard look at the suppliers you work with, and determine if they hold the same sustainability values as you. [13:25] What are the benefits of ISO 20400? – Reduced environmental impact: By selecting suppliers with strong environmental performance, businesses can reduce their overall environmental footprint. You also have a great chance to help influence your own supply chain, we know that if you've had a reliable supplier for a number of years, it's not just a simple case of cut and move on. Improved social responsibility: ISO 20400 encourages organizations to consider the social and ethical impacts of their procurement decisions, such as fair labor practices and human rights. Enhanced reputation: Demonstrating a commitment to sustainable procurement can enhance your reputation and brand image. It shows that you're thinking and acting sustainably from start to finish for either your product production or service delivery. Cost savings: Sustainable procurement practices can lead to cost savings through reduced waste, improved resource efficiency, and lower long-term maintenance costs. Increased innovation: Working with sustainable suppliers can expose you to new technologies, products, and services that can improve your own operations. [15:35] What are the disadvantages of ISO 20400? – Increased complexity: Integrating sustainability considerations into procurement processes can add complexity and require additional resources. This would include supplier checks before working with new suppliers and a review of all current suppliers to see where improvement could be made. Finding sustainable suppliers: Identifying and qualifying sustainable suppliers can be challenging. Though more businesses are certainly making an effort to be more sustainable, ensuring they have proof of their claims is essential. Potential for higher costs: In some cases, sustainable products and services may have a higher initial cost compared to conventional options. Limited scope: ISO 20400 focuses primarily on procurement practices and may not address broader sustainability issues within the organization. This is where ISO 20400 can be supported by certifiable standards such as ISO 14001 and ISO 50001. [17:00] What is ISO 14064? – ISO 14064-1 is an internationally recognized standard that provides a framework for organizations to quantify and report their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and removals. It helps organizations to: · Understand their carbon footprint · Set reduction targets · Engage in carbon markets · Improve environmental performance [17:45] What are the benefits of ISO 14064? Improved data quality: The standard provides a robust methodology for collecting, analyzing, and reporting GHG emissions data, ensuring accuracy and consistency. Set achievable reduction targets: By having an accurate way to measure your impact, you can look to set realistic and more importantly achievable reduction targets. Enhanced credibility and transparency: Both consumers and stakeholders are increasingly looking at real tangible evidence of your carbon claims. Simply having a sustainability page full of promises is no longer enough, you need facts and figures to back up what you say you're doing. Reduced climate risk: By understanding and managing your GreenHouse Gas emissions, you can better mitigate the risks associated with climate change, such as regulatory changes and physical impacts. Competitive advantage: In an increasingly climate-conscious world, businesses that can demonstrate their environmental performance through credible GHG reporting will gain a competitive advantage. [19:30] What are the disadvantages of ISO 14064? Initial investment: Much like the other Standards, if you want to do this right you will have to invest time, resources and money. That could include hiring consultants to help you with the necessary calculations, and if you wish to go for full verification, then there will be an additional cost from a verification body. Ongoing maintenance: Maintaining an accurate and up-to-date GHG inventory requires ongoing effort and resources. Monitoring your emissions doesn't stop once you get a verification badge, it will be on-going. Data complexity: Collecting and analyzing GHG emissions data can be complex, especially for large and diverse organizations. So, you may need some initial help to do and understand this yourselves. Limited scope: ISO 14064-1 focuses primarily on the quantification and reporting of GHG emissions and removals, and may not address broader sustainability issues. If you'd like any assistance with implementing any of these Standards, get in touch with us, we'd be happy to help! We'd love to hear your views and comments about the ISO Show, here's how: ● Share the ISO Show on Twitter or Linkedin ● Leave an honest review on iTunes or Soundcloud. Your ratings and reviews really help and we read each one. Subscribe to keep up-to-date with our latest episodes: Stitcher | Spotify | YouTube |iTunes | Soundcloud | Mailing List

If you've ever implemented an ISO Standard, then the term Management Review will be familiar to you. It's a mandatory part of the implementation process, and a crucial tool for monitoring continual improvement. Somewhere down the line, it's become a bit of a myth that a Management Review needs to be an annual meeting. That is simply not the case, while required by the Standard, it's very flexible on how this could be achieved. In this episode Ian discusses the purpose of Management Review, including what you should be including and getting out of the review and breaks down the fallacy of the annual event. You'll learn · What is the purpose of a Management Review? · What are the common misconceptions about Management Review? · How Management Review supports other clause requirements · What are the inputs for Management Review? · What are the outputs of a Management Review? Resources · Isologyhub · How to conduct a Management Review · How to get the most out of your Management Review In this episode, we talk about: [02:05] Episode Summary – Ian discusses the real purpose of Management Review, and dispels the myth of the annual event. [02:35] What is the purpose of a Management Review?: Management Review is a requirement of all ISO Standards. It's main purpose is to check if your Management System is fit for purpose, and what needs to be updated to ensure it aligns with your businesses objectives and strategic direction. In short, it's there as a check to see what's working well and what's not working well, in addition to continual improvement considerations. [03:30] What are some common misconceptions about Management Review?: Some common misconceptions include:- · That it's simply a formality – Rubber-stamping things and missing out on the opportunity to effectively monitor management system progress · That It must be once a year · Having to review everything in excruciating detail i.e. all audit findings · The need to update the risk assessment and re-jigging scores · That you must review and update your SWOT/PESTLE · Or review and update all management system documentation · That it's the perfect opportunity to re-write a policy There is a time and place for all of these, and you could tackle some of this in a Management Review if you really want to, but that is not the main purpose of a Management Review. [04:50] How Management Review supports other clause requirements - Leadership: If we take ISO 9001 as an example, the Leadership clause states: "Top management shall demonstrate leadership and commitment with respect to the quality management system by: a) taking accountability for the effectiveness of the quality management system e) ensuring that the resources needed for the quality management system are available g) ensuring that the quality management system achieves its intended results" These requirements at first glance may seem like they'd require a lot of effort and monitoring of many different factors, but in actuality they can all be satisfied through effective Management Review. [05:55] What involvement is required from top management? As stated in ISO Standards:- "Top management shall review the organization's management system, at planned intervals, to ensure its continuing suitability, adequacy, effectiveness and alignment with the strategic direction of the organization." Top management also have involvement in the following elements of implementing and maintaining a management system: · Context · IPs · Risks/Ops · Objectives · Policy · Support · Operation · Performance monitoring Management Review relates specifically to 'performance monitoring', but that in of itself will include elements of all the other clauses within the Standard, and many of those require top managements involvement on some level. [07:45] The fallacy of the annual event – The Management Review clause specifically states that a Management Review should be 'carried out at planned intervals'. Many had interpreted that as once a year, which has been the prevailing myth for decades. Looking at the Standard, no where does it say 'once a year', planned intervals means it could be once a month, it could be once a week, it could be a set points during the summer. When deciding on these planned intervals, take into consideration the nature of your business, the size of your business, the risks associated with it and the maturity of your Management System. This will determine how frequent the Management Review should be, as it will differ for every business. [09:10] Examples of Management Review frequency – Ian has worked in an organisation where they had a rather grand Management Review process, where top management and other relevant individuals meet to review the past year and set the scene for the following year. That same organisation also had monthly meetings with the same members of top management to keep on top of new and on-going issues. That isn't to say this is the only way to run Management Review. Some opt to have quarterly meetings, others once every 6 months and some even leave it to once a year. [10:40] What is required of Management Review? Inputs – Clause 9.3 details the requirements of Management Reivew in most Standards (some swap 9.3 and 9.2 around, but the contents remains the same). First, the inputs required for Management Review include: The status of actions from previous management reviews - If you said you were going to do something before, how's that going? Changes in external and internal issues that are relevant to the quality management system - this doesn't mean that every meeting should consider the SWOT/PESTLE/IP tables, but there must be some determination of when that's done in detail and when a senior mgt discussion should include the key aspects of that and its impact. There is a need to review these things when required anyway, so doing it only at pre-defined times can be problematic. Information on the performance and effectiveness of the quality management system, including tends in:- · Customer satisfaction and feedback from relevant interested parties; · The extent to which objectives have been met; · Process performance and conformity of products and services; · Nonconformities and corrective actions; · Monitoring and measurement results; · Audit results; · The performance of external providers; · The adequacy of resources; · The effectiveness of actions taken to address risks and opportunities; · Opportunities for improvement. [20:45] What is required of Management Review? Outputs – You will also have a number of outputs from Management Review, including:- Opportunities for Improvement – This could be as a result or reviewing audit findings and discussing the OFI's found and how you can address and implement these. You could also use the Management Review to review and set new objectives for the year ahead. Any need for changes to the management system – You may need to review policies and procedures and see if they're still fit for purpose, if they're not then this is a good venue to discuss and update them. Other aspects that may have changed or will have a need to change include: · Interested parties – have their needs and expectations changed? · People – Do you need to change the people involved with certain processes? · Awareness – Do you need to raise more awareness around a specific topic? Resource needs – You may need to raise the need for more resourcing in regard to the management system or related processes. If you'd like to learn about alternative ways to host a Management Review, listen to one of our previous episodes. We'd love to hear your views and comments about the ISO Show, here's how: ● Share the ISO Show on Twitter or Linkedin ● Leave an honest review on iTunes or Soundcloud. Your ratings and reviews really help and we read each one. Subscribe to keep up-to-date with our latest episodes: Stitcher | Spotify | YouTube |iTunes | Soundcloud | Mailing List

The importance of setting key objectives can't be understated. They help drive continual improvement and reflect a business's key metrics for success in various areas. They are also a key aspect of implementing an ISO Standard, with most specifying a dedicated Objectives clause. While most businesses will have objectives irrespective of any ISO certification, many may fall into the familiar trappings of having separate objectives for different departments, which only serves to fragment your measurement of success. In this episode Ian discusses the importance of setting key business objectives, and why you should be aligning these with your strategic direction. You'll learn · What is the Annex SL format and why was it introduced? · What is meant by 'Strategic Direction'? · The importance of risks and opportunities in objective planning · Who are setting key business objectives important? · How can you align objectives with a businesses strategic direction? Resources · Isologyhub In this episode, we talk about: [02:05] Episode Summary – Ian discusses how to align objectives with the strategic direction of the business, and why it's important to do so. [02:55] What is the Annex SL format and why was it introduced?: The Annex SL format refers to the standard 10 clause structure that we now see in most ISO Standards. Introduced back in 2015, it sought to address the issues with integrating multiple Standards, in addition to making them more accessible to every sector. Prior to 2015, many ISO standards were designed with specific sectors in mind, using terminology that would make sense to them, but perhaps not to others. The Annes SL format now uses the same language across all ISO's, making It easy to integrate multiple ISO compliant Management Systems. [06:10] What is meant by the term Strategic Direction? Leadership: This is a term that appears in ISO 9001 5 times. We first see it in Clause 5 – Leadership, where it states: "Top management shall demonstrate leadership and commitment with respect to the management system by ensuring that the policy of objectives are established for the management system and are compatible with the context and strategic direction of the organisation." This is where it's made explicitly clear that leadership / management are responsible for ensuring the Management System aligns with the way their business runs, in addition to integrating it into existing processes. [07:05] What is meant by the term Strategic Direction? Management Review: It also appear in clause 9.3 Management Review, where it states: "Top management shall review the organisation system at planned intervals to ensure its continuing suitability adequacy, effectiveness and alignment with the strategic direction of the organisation." Again, this reinforces the need for top management to be involved to ensure that the Management System is in alignment with their overall goals. [08:40] What is meant by the term Strategic Direction? Context of the Organisation: It also appears at the very start of the auditable clauses, in Clause 4 – Context of the organisation, where it states: "The organisation shall determine the external and internal issues which are relevant to its purpose and its strategic direction." This involves looking at issues from a legal, technical, competitive, cultural and economic point of view, and many of these will be determined by top or broader management within the business. They ultimately have the most influence in how a Management System is built, therefore have the most influence on how the policies and objectives are created. [10:45] The importance of risks and opportunities in Objective planning – Clause 6 (Planning) is where we address risks and opportunities raised in clause 4. It states that 'Objectives must be established at relevant functions, levels and processes." For us at Blackmores, we directly relate the findings from a risks and opportunities assessment (such as a SWOT & PESTLE), and link these to our objectives to try and minimise those risks. We also leverage the opportunities, by making them real tangible goals to work towards – seems obvious but we often see businesses missing the link between these exercises! [12:00] How can you set Objectives in alignment with Strategic Direction?: Many businesses now build their mission, values and strategic direction around sustainability and general ESG. When building a management system, you need to consider how it affects those sustainability / ESG goals, because that is essentially the context of your organisation. So, you'd need to consider: How does environmental performance, health & safety performance or legal compliance contribute to the success of the management system as a whole? You don't have to be going for ISO 14001 or ISO 45001 for these things to matter, even a quality management system can contribute to sustainability goals. This can be through improving economic performance by reducing waste ect. Also, don't be afraid to relate economic performance to your management system. If you have a turnover goal of X, mention that in your context documentation, and also consider how the management system can contribute to achieving that goal i.e. through processes, controls, monitoring and improvement activity. Also consider your client requirements, they may require an accident rate below X which can also be included in context documentation and can then be factored into your management system measures and objectives if need be to achieve that. [16:55] How do you establish your objectives? – First you must establish context, and that context must be relevant to the purpose and strategic direction of the business. The context setting must include those who understand that context, strategic direction and the purpose of the business, the risks and opportunities must be assessed in relation to that context, which in turn is already aligned with strategic direction. Finally the objectives must be set in relation to those risks and opportunities. It's all about having the right people to identify the relevant issues affecting the organisation, and setting concrete objectives in order to improve that. We'd love to hear your views and comments about the ISO Show, here's how: ● Share the ISO Show on Twitter or Linkedin ● Leave an honest review on iTunes or Soundcloud. Your ratings and reviews really help and we read each one. Subscribe to keep up-to-date with our latest episodes: Stitcher | Spotify | YouTube |iTunes | Soundcloud | Mailing List

AI usage has skyrocketed in the past 2 years, with many commonplace apps and software now featuring an AI integration in some form. With the rapid development and possibilities unlocked with this powerful technology, it can be tempting to go full steam ahead with implementing AI use into your day-to-day business activities. However, new technologies come with new risks that need to be understood and mitigated before any potential incidents. In this episode Mark Philip, Information Security Manager at Cloud Direct, joins Ian to discuss emerging AI risks and how you can build AI resilience into your existing practices. You'll learn · Who is Mark? · Who is Cloud Direct? · How can you assess your current level of AI resilience? · What are some of the key threats that AI systems currently face, and how can you mitigate these? · How can you utilise AI to enhance your security? · What is best practice when responding to an AI related security incident? Resources · Cloud Direct · Isologyhub In this episode, we talk about: [02:05] Episode Summary – We invite Cloud Direct's Information Security Manager, Mark Philip, onto the show to discuss AI risks and how to build in AI resilience into your existing security practices. [03:25] Who is Mark Philip?: While his primary role is as an Information Security Manager at Cloud Direct, a little known fact about him is that he is an amateur triathlete! At London earlier in 2024, he was lucky enough to bump into Alistair Brownlee, who is the UK's two time gold olympic medalist in triathlon. [05:10] Who are Cloud Direct? – Founded in 2003, Cloud Direct are a Microsoft Azure expert MSP that is the top of Microsoft accreditation that any partner can hold, putting them in the top 5% of Microsoft partners globally. They offer consultancy and professional managed services, specialising in Microsoft Cloud, which is all underpinned with security across the whole Microsoft stack. They also assist with digital transformation and modernisation. [06:30] Assessing the current AI risk landscape: Ian points out that a recent report from the Capgemini Research Institute found that 97% or organisations are using generative AI. With this increase in AI use, there is a correlation with an increase in security incidents related to AI. Mark adds that this technology is so new, with a lot of larger software companies such as Microsoft pushing AI elements into their tools. So there is a learning curve involved with utilising the technology. There is also a lack of Risk Assessment being done in relation to AI, not a lot of though is going into the use of AI on a day-to-day basis. If you're using an AI platform, you need to ask yourself: What is this platform actually doing with the data I'm inputting? There is also the fact that shady individuals are already leveraging this technology with the likes of deep fakes, bad bots and more sophisticated phishing schemes – and the harsh truth is that they're going to get better at it over time. [08:20] What is AI resilience and why is it so important? – AI resilience is about equipping businesses with the processes that control the use and deployment of AI usage, so that they can anticipate and mitigate any AI risks effectively. Similar to ISO Standards, this would involve a risk-based approach. However, this will look very different depending on your business and how you are using AI. For example, the risks of someone using AI to generate a transcript of meeting notes will be much lower in comparison to a healthcare company using complex sets of data with AI to synthesize new medicines. So, if you are using AI you need to consider what the inherent risks could be, and that would be dependent on the data you're processing i.e. is it sensitive data? And then factor in if the software is publicly available (such as ChatGPT), or it is a closed model under your control? Asking these types of questions will give you a more realistic outlook on the risk landscape you face. [10:35] How can a business assess their current level of AI resilience? AI is here to stay, so you won't be able to avoid if forever. So first, you need to embrace and understand it, and that includes creating a clear picture of your use cases. Mark states they did this exercise internally at Cloud Direct when they were starting to use Microsoft's Co-Pilot. They asked themselves: · What sort of data is the software interacting with? · What data are we putting into it? · How do Microsoft manage the program and related security? · Are Mircrosoft storing any of that data? It's not just about the security either, you need to understand why your using AI and if it will actually be to your benefit. A lot of people are using it because it's new and shiny, but if it's not actively helping you achieve your business goals, then it's more of a distraction than anything else. For those looking for additional guidance on AI policies, risks and resilience, there's a lot of guidance provided by both ISO and the NCSC. ISO 42001 in particular is useful for both people using AI and developers creating AI. If you're stuck on where to start, a Gap Analysis is a fantastic tool to see where you are currently and what gaps you need to bridge in your security to cover any AI usage, and to see how well you are complying with current legal requirements (the EU AI Act is now in effect!). Another tool is a Risk Assessment. You may not process what many would consider sensitive data, such as healthcare information, but even if you store and hold customer data, then you need to ensure that any AI you use doesn't pose a risk to it. [14:30] How can AI improve security and resilience? – Sticking with Microsoft as an example, as they are releasing a lot of AI driven tools, they can be used to fill gaps that humans may not have the time to do. Once example of this is monitoring and sending security alerts, previously a system may have just sent this to a human member of staff to resolve, but now AI security tools can act on those alerts on your behalf. So, if you have limited IT resources, this could be a fantastic addition to your security set-up. It also eliminates the lag of human response, and AI can look at things in a way a human wouldn't think to. [17:55] How do people stay ahead of the curve in the evolving AI landscape? – You should be using the myriad of resources available to learn about AI, as there are webinars, social media feeds, blogs and videos released constantly. Microsoft in particular are offering a comprehensive feed of information relating to AI, the risks and new technologies in development. The key is to understand AI before integrating it into your business. Don't just jump at the new shiny toys being advertised to you, go to reputable sources such as the ICO, NCSC, Cyber Essentials and regulatory bodies to learn about the technology, the benefits it can bring in addition to the risks you need to mitigate against. Mark can vouch for Microsoft's though leadership in this field, as they keep all of their customers up-to-date with all of their AI related developments. Cloud Direct themselves are also putting out some great content, so don't forget to check out their resources. If you are already utilising Microsoft's tools, the Cloud Direct can help explain how their new tools can apply to your business. If you're looking for assistance with ISO 42001, then Blackmores can help you with implementing a robust AI Management System. [21:40] What is best practice when responding to an AI related incident? – To be honest, there's no reason to not treat it like any other security incident. We've already adapted to more sophisticated security risks as a result of the move towards home and hybrid working over the pandemic. This simply another stage along in this ever changing security landscape. You should treat it like assessing any new step, and you likely have all the processes in place for analysing risk already in place, simply apply them to the usage of AI and put in place the necessary governance based on your findings. Standards such as ISO 20000 IT Service Management and ISO 22301 Business Continuity are fantastic tools of you're new to this sort of incident response planning. If you've already been certified to these standards, then you likely have the following in place already: · Risk Assessments · Business Impact Assessments · Business Continuity Plans · Recovery Plans Simply add AI as an additional risk factor into your existing management system and update the necessary documentation to include actions and considerations for its use. If you update your Business Continuity and recovery plans, then make sure to test them! Don't just assume that they will work, put them to the test and adjust until you're comfortable that in a real incident, everyone in the business knows how to react, what to communicate and how to get back up and running. [24:00] What are Mark's predictions for the field of AI resilience? – People need to look at the opportunities in utilising AI, a lot of people are using it without really understanding it so there's a lot of learning still to do. So, he expects to see a lot of businesses fully grasping how they can use AI to their advantage in the coming years. With that comes the challenge of ensuring it's integrated safely, with the right governance embedded to ensure its safe and ethical usage across entire organisations. Another big challenge is the handling data privacy within AI. Scams are only going to get more complex as AI develops, and you need to ensure your business can protect against that as much as possible. Also businesses should carefully consider what AI platforms they choose to use. Ensure you understand what data is being input and stored, and the level of control you have over it. All of this to say, there are a lot of massive benefits of using AI and you should shy away from it. But, you need to ensure you are using it safely and ethically. [27:30] What is Mark's book recommendation? – The hunt for Red October by Tom Clancy [28:45] What is Mark's favorite quote? – "I have a bad feeling about this…" – Star Wars Want to learn more about Cloud Direct? Check out their website. We'd love to hear your views and comments about the ISO Show, here's how: ● Share the ISO Show on Twitter or Linkedin ● Leave an honest review on iTunes or Soundcloud. Your ratings and reviews really help and we read each one. Subscribe to keep up-to-date with our latest episodes: Stitcher | Spotify | YouTube |iTunes | Soundcloud | Mailing List

The uptick in greenwashing cases, and subsequent outing of these claims only serves to make stakeholders and consumers dubious of any businesses sustainability pledges. One key way to combat this is to have the information to back up your claims, something that is becoming a mandatory requirement for some depending on sector, location or company size. In this episode, Mel dives into the use of ISO 14064 and how verification to this internationally recognised Standard can help companies build trust and ensure their climate action claims are genuine and impactful. You'll learn · What is Greenmasking? · Why there is a need for transparency in green claims · What is Greenhouse Gas Statement Verification? · What is ISO 14064? · How can ISO 14064 Verification combat greenmasking? Resources · Carbonology · 7 Shades of Greenwashing Guide In this episode, we talk about: [02:05] Episode Summary – In this episode, Mel delves into the world of ISO 14064 and explores how verification under this international standard can help companies build trust and ensure their climate action claims are genuine. Catch-up with the previous episodes in the series here: The Rise of Greenwashing The 7 Shades of Greenwashing [03:05] What is greenmasking?: Greenmasking (a term coined by Carbonology®) is used to describe the practice where organisations self-certify their environmental impact without independent verification. This means they claim their green credentials are accurate while avoiding transparency about their methodology and data. Essentially, they are "marking their own homework," which can lead to misleading claims about their sustainability efforts. This could be compared to someone completing their own MOT and signing it off themselves, instead of taking it to a qualified mechanic. Obviously, that MOT certificate wouldn't be valid in that case, and would have no credibility when it came to selling the car. [04:45] The need for transparency – For carbon reporting to succeed globally, enforcement will need to be standardised across all nations. With transparency around ESG initiatives increasingly important, you need to be able to objectively and accurately measure and report on your carbon footprint. Some to keep an eye on include the Green Claims Directive and the Anti-Greenwashing Charter. Stakeholders are now looking for independent Verification of the accuracy of your emissions data and your calculated carbon footprint through Standards such as ISO 14064-3. [07:05] What is Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Statement Verification? - GHG Verification is the engagement of an independent third-party by an organisation to provide Verification of their GHG statements using standards such as ISO 14064-3. Carbon footprint Verification involves, collecting data and reporting on your emissions from your company's activities, and then independently verifying its accuracy to provide assurance to stakeholders that your claims are transparent and true. If you'd like to learn more about the differences between the Greenhouse Gas Protocol and ISO 14064, check out a previous episode. [08:10] What is ISO 14064-1 and ISO 14064-3? – This is the specification for Greenhouse Gas emissions reporting and part 3 is the specification for verifying that, covering more elements than the Greenhouse Gas protocol. The reporting requires you to collect data from various sources across your scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions, collating it into a report and then have that report independently checked against the requirements of ISO 14064. [09:45] How can Greenhouse Gas Verification combat greenmasking? – · Highlights integrity - Verification against ISO 14064-1 highlights the veracity of your systems and processes to prove your GHG inventory, assertions and reports conform to the ISO 14064 standard; and are free from errors, omissions or misstatements, demonstrating the highest integrity of your GHG reporting. · Validation of Net Zero goals - Verification against ISO 14064-1, establishes the integrity of your claims towards Net Zero. · Verify success - Verification against ISO 14064-1 provides assurance of your carbon footprint declarations which will give confidence in achieving the projected emission reductions · Stakeholder assurance - Stakeholders are increasingly looking for independent Verification of GHG Data to prove reduction are achieved year on year Download a copy of The 7 Shades of Greenwashing from Carbonology's website here. If you would like some assistance with carbon Standards and reporting, simply get in touch with the team over at Carbonology. We'd love to hear your views and comments about the ISO Show, here's how: ● Share the ISO Show on Twitter or Linkedin ● Leave an honest review on iTunes or Soundcloud. Your ratings and reviews really help and we read each one. Subscribe to keep up-to-date with our latest episodes: Stitcher | Spotify | YouTube |iTunes | Soundcloud | Mailing List

The rampant rise of greenwashing threatens to undermine genuine sustainability efforts and mislead consumers, with over 900 businesses in Europe being accused of the practice in 2024. Greenwashing can come in many different forms, and the tactics used aren't always easy to spot. In this episode, Mel dives into the 7 shades of greenwashing and explains the common greenwashing tactics you should be on the lookout for. You'll learn · What is Greencrowding? · What is Greenlighting? · What is Greenshifting? · What is Greenlabelling? · What is Greenrinsing? · What is Greenhushing? · What is Greenmasking? Resources · Carbonology · 7 Shades of Greenwashing Guide In this episode, we talk about: [02:05] Episode Summary – In the 2nd part of this 3-part series on greenwashing, we dive into the various methods and tactics used by businesses to avoid their sustainability obligations. [03:05] What is greencrowding?: This tactic relies on safety in numbers and occurs when different groups (like governments, organisations and companies) join forces to create the impression of making significant environmental changes. For example, 8 of the world's biggest 20 plastic polluters including companies such as Royal Dutch Shell, Coca-Cola, and BP are part of the Alliance to End Plastic Waste, however the group moves at the speed of the slowest member and sets low environmental targets to stall action as it is often costly and involves a lot of the companies resources and time [03:55] What is greenlighting? – This is when companies spotlight a particularly 'green' product or operation which helps to draw attention away from tis otherwise environmentally damaging activities. Commonly seen in the car industry, recent BMW campaigning highlights the company's electric vehicles, despite being heavily invested in combustion engine vehicles therefore not addressing their major source of emissions. Another example is Exxonmobil, who heavily advertised its "advanced biofuels" made from algae, however didn't mention the fact that the biofuels made up a miniscule part of production. Since coming under scrutiny Exxonmobil have rescinded this project altogether and haven't looked to practical alternatives. [05:15] What is greenshifting? - This is where the blame gets shifted onto consumers. BP's "Know your carbon footprint" campaign is a key example, it invited customers to share pledges for reducing their individual emissions yet BP's core business continue to partake and scheme hugely polluting oil and gas projects. Another example include H&M who urged consumers to recycle their old clothes yet, the company continues to be a prime culprit in fast-fashion and have a significant part to plat in over-consumerism leading to environmental degradation. [06:10] The growing need for comprehensive carbon reporting – This occurs when companies use words like 'eco', 'sustainable' or related wording or symbols conveying green messaging with no evidence to support it. Kohl's and Walmart were sued for labelling toxic rayon textiles as eco-friendly bamboo. Another more recent example is McDonald's Paper Straws where In 2019 a paper straws to introduced to replace plastic ones, claiming it was an eco-friendly move. However, it was later revealed that these paper straws were not recyclable, leading to criticism that the company was misleading consumers about the environmental benefits. [07:15] What is greenrinsing? - This is where companies change their sustainability commitments or targets before actually achieving them. Repeatedly, Coca-cola has missed and moved its recycling targets. Between 2020 – 2022, the company dropped its targets for using recycled packaging from 50% by 2030 to 25% proving these targets were not sufficiently made. BP and ExxonMobil are two more examples of being criticized for frequently updating their climate targets without substantial progress. Various ambitious goals were announced over the years, but critics argue that these targets are often revised or postponed making it hard to assess real achievements and also trust between consumers, investors and legal frameworks are lost. So the takeaway here is, make sure you're targets are realistic! [08:45] What is greenhushing? – This occurs when companies deliberately underreport or hide green credentials to evade scrutiny, which is a rising practice found in larger firms who struggle to successfully hit their targets/ aims. Commonly found with firms that make distant net zero targets but do not report on progress. It allows them to hide the fact that they are not taking meaningful steps. Companies often avoid reporting positive environmental measures they may be taking to prevent greenwashing accusations which can be argued as counter-productive in the efforts to help drive systemic and industrial change in the most polluting industries. H&M and ExxonMobil are key examples of greenhushing and no-longer actively promote their sustainability practices as they have faced criticism over false / limited actions in the past. This one is rather damaging, especially to those who are taking meaningful sustainable action, but may not be keeping up with their targets. This is why it's so crucial to make those targets obtainable. If this practice continues, then there is less pressure overall for businesses to do their part for sustainability. It's important to celebrate the victories, no matter how small, as it all adds up to the bigger picture. [10:55] What is greenmasking? - Greenmasking (a term coined by Carbonology®) is used to describe the practice where organisations self-certify their environmental impact without independent verification. This means they claim their green credentials are accurate while avoiding transparency about their methodology and data. Essentially, they are "marking their own homework," which can lead to misleading claims about their sustainability efforts. Some companies offer ISO 14064 consulting and verification services that may not always adhere to the rigorous standards required for genuine verification. This can result in poor practices and undermine the credibility of the certification. For example, some consulting firms might offer ISO 14064 verification as part of their services but fail to conduct thorough and independent audits. Instead, they may 'verify' the data is correct in-house. This can lead to situations where companies are able to self-label their environmental impact as compliant with ISO 14064 without truly meeting the standard's requirements. This results in a vast amount of unreliable and untrustworthy data that is purportedly verified. Furthermore, with some consultancy companies asserting that offering both consultancy and verification within the same firm is a viable option, it paves the way for poor reporting standards to be accepted, only worsening the problem in the long run. Greenmasking can have significant implications for stakeholders, including investors, customers, and regulators, who rely on accurate and transparent environmental reporting. To combat greenmasking, it is crucial for organisations to seek independent and accredited verification of their GHG emissions ensuring that their sustainability claims are credible and based upon the rigorous standards stated in ISO14064-3. Download a copy of The 7 Shades of Greenwashing from Carbonology's website here. If you would like some assistance with carbon Standards and reporting, simply get in touch with the team over at Carbonology. We'd love to hear your views and comments about the ISO Show, here's how: ● Share the ISO Show on Twitter or Linkedin ● Leave an honest review on iTunes or Soundcloud. Your ratings and reviews really help and we read each one. Subscribe to keep up-to-date with our latest episodes: Stitcher | Spotify | YouTube |iTunes | Soundcloud | Mailing List

In a world increasingly concerned about environmental impact, companies are under immense pressure to demonstrate their sustainability credentials. But how can businesses truly differentiate themselves from those simply paying lip service to green practices? Greenwashing is a term that you will likely be familiar with, as it's one that's been on the rise as consumer preference steers towards those who are seen to be doing the right thing. Alarmingly, high-severity cases, which involve companies that took a purposeful and systematic approach to concealing ESG violations, rise by more than 32% year on year. In our upcoming 3-part series we'll be exploring the impact of greenwashing on business, the different types of greenwashing and the role verification can play in building genuine evidence based sustainability strategies. In this episode, Mel dives into the first of this 3-part series to explain what greenwashing is, the common tactics used in greenwashing and how businesses can build genuine sustainability. You'll learn · Who is greenwashing? · Where did the term originate from? · The rise of greenwashing · What are some of the common greenwashing tactics used? · The danger of greenwashing · How can businesses build genuine sustainability strategies? Resources · Carbonology In this episode, we talk about: [02:05] Episode Summary – We kick off our 3-part greenwashing series with an exploration of what greenwashing really is, the common greenwashing tactics businesses employ and how you can avoid those pitfalls to build genuine sustainability within your business. [05:25] What is greenwashing?: Greenwashing, in essence, is the deceptive use of environmental claims to mislead consumers into believing a company's products or services are more environmentally friendly than they actually are. [05:45] Where did the term 'greenwashing' originate from? – The term "greenwashing" was coined in 1986 by Jay Westerveld, an American environmentalist. Westerveld first used the term in an essay describing his experience at a hotel in Fiji. The hotel encouraged guests to reuse towels to "save the environment," but Westerveld observed that the hotel was simultaneously expanding its operations, significantly impacting the local environment. This contradiction highlighted the hotel's primary intent to cut costs rather than genuinely conserve resources. Westerveld's observation exemplified how businesses could deceptively use environmental claims to mislead consumers into believing their products or services are more environmentally friendly than they actually are. [06:35] The rise of greenwashing: Many businesses over a wide range of industries have made a pledge to reduce their carbon impact by 2050, driven by both an increase in regulation and consumer perception. However, the Economist highlighted some troubling research, citing that while many businesses will puff out their claims of sustainable practices, many don't have the evidence to back them up. Many should have the resource, say an Asset Manager, that could provide tangible reports on their carbon consumption each year, and yet they choose not to publicly disclose any such reports. So, a lot of talking the talk, but not walking the walk! [07:40] The growing need for comprehensive carbon reporting – There are a number of sustainability and ESG regulations now in effect, with more to come in 2025 (such as the Green Claims Directive that is due to come into affect on the 27th March 2025) that require businesses of different sizes and sectors to report on their carbon consumption and reduction. If you'd like to learn more about a few of these, check out our previous episodes on: · SECR · ISBB S2 · CSRD · CSDDD [08:15] What are the common tactics used in greenwashing? These can include:- · Vague and Ambiguous Claims: Phrases like "eco-friendly" or "sustainable" are often used without specific, quantifiable data. However, the EU Green Claims Directive, in theory help address this, although this only applied in Europe. · Focus on Single Issues: Highlighting one minor environmental benefit while ignoring significant negative impacts across the supply chain. · False Labels and Certifications: Creating misleading labels or misrepresenting genuine certifications. There are numerous 'Green certifications' out there that charge for a badge, without providing any evidence, of for those that do provide information it could just be a document that isn't evidence based i.e. a Policy statement or 'pledge' or 'commitment' · "Greenwashing by Association": Implying a connection to environmental causes through sponsorships or marketing campaigns. [10:15] The danger of greenwashing – The danger with greenwashing is the negative impact it has through an Erosion of Consumer Trust. People are becoming increasingly skeptical of environmental claims, making it harder for truly sustainable companies to gain credibility. Greenwashing can also lead to Distorted Market Signals: creating a false impression of progress, hindering genuine innovation and investment in sustainable solutions. [11:30] How can businesses build genuine sustainability strategies? · Transparency and Accountability: Disclose environmental data openly and transparently. Seek independent third-party verification of sustainability claims. Focus on Life-Cycle Assessment: Evaluate environmental impacts across the entire product or service lifecycle, from raw material extraction to end-of-life disposal. Continuous Improvement: Set ambitious, measurable, and time-bound environmental targets. Regularly review and refine sustainability strategies based on performance data. Engage with Stakeholders: Collaborate with suppliers, customers, and other stakeholders to identify and address environmental challenges. If you would like some assistance with carbon Standards and reporting, simply get in touch with the team over at Carbonology. We'd love to hear your views and comments about the ISO Show, here's how: ● Share the ISO Show on Twitter or Linkedin ● Leave an honest review on iTunes or Soundcloud. Your ratings and reviews really help and we read each one. Subscribe to keep up-to-date with our latest episodes: Stitcher | Spotify | YouTube |iTunes | Soundcloud | Mailing List

The end of another year has rolled around in the blink of an eye! We've managed to publish a whopping 42 episodes this year, pushing us over the 200 episode mark. We want to thank all our listeners, both old and new, for allowing us to continue to share both ISO tips and success stories from our wonderful clients. We hope you'll follow along as we continue our podcasting journey in 2025. To close out the year, Ian Battersby and Steve Mason share some of their stories of misadventures during audits, from common mistakes, to broom battles and forklift mishaps, they really have seen it all! Listen, laugh and learn what not to do during an audit. You'll learn · What not to do in an audit Resources · Isologyhub In this episode, we talk about: [02:05] Episode Summary – Ian and Steve share some of their experiences from their time as auditors. From common mistakes to outlandish situations that you'd have to see to believe, listen and learn what shouldn't happen during an audit. [03:40] Lazy Copycats: Steve recounts a time where a company had copy and pasted their Management Review for years, which rightfully earned them a non-conformity. Ian shares a similar story where a construction company submitting a tender had copy pasted the content and included the wrong company name! The copying doesn't stop there, as Steve remembers a company Quality Manual that managed to include multiple company names. It was found that they'd simply copy and pasted example pages they'd found online that looked good, but didn't bother to update any of the content to be relevant to them. [06:30] Training Troubles – Ian recounts a time where he was auditing a subcontractor for a construction company that required a record of training. The induction was very important and obviously needed to be documented. When he checked the documents, though all the forms had different names, all the signatures suspiciously had the exact same handwriting! Turns out the Director was signing them all off, which is obviously in breach of a number of health and safety related regulations. [08:00] IT Security slip-ups – Steve recounts a time where a Finance Director had good intentions, but poorly implemented his idea. The Finance Director didn't trust their IT system back-up and instead backed-up all his information on a memory stick. Steve had pointed out the flaws with this, such as losing the memory stick, data getting corrupted ect. It just simply isn't a safe or reliable way to store such important information. [09:05] Disconnected Leadership – Ian shares a time where an auditor caught the lack of leadership commitment to their management system. Despite it being a very nice looking management system by all accounts, the cracks showed enough for an outsider to spot the flaws. Steve adds that sometimes, you can over engineer a management system to a point past useful. It needs to work for your business, otherwise people will work around it to get what they need done. Steve had a rather obvious example if this when he required a chat with a member of leadership, who refused on the day initially, despite it being scheduled for 6 months. The person relented a few minutes over lunch where he posed his complete commitment to BS 5750 – A standard that existed 20 years ago and had since been replaced by ISO 9001. Very telling for his level of 'commitment'. As we have covered in a previous episode – Leadership commitment is imperative to a successful management system. [11:40] Skip Diving for Secrets – Steve shares his experience of conducting a skip diving exercise, which is following a document waste trail. At a certain company, they ended up looking in an actual skip only to find what looked like a lot of confidential documents, when questioned someone had said that they looked like they belonged in the CEO's filing cabinet. When questioned, the CEO remarked 'I didn't want you to catch me with anything that I shouldn't have, so I threw it all out last night'. This warranted a non-conformity as anyone could have gone past and fished out that confidential information just as Steve had. Ian also adds a time where he worked in the NHS and a local hospital had an accident where a lot of confidential medical files ended up scattered across the floor. These were documents that should have been disposed of securely. [14:05] PPE? You've got to be kidding me! – Ian recounts a time working for a manufacturing company that was part of a large international firm. Their UK operation had to abide by strict PPE requirements, proper shoes, eye protection ect. It was something that everyone on the premises had to adhere to. One day, a Director walked in with none of the PPE which was clearly labelled on many of the signs decorating the shop floor. He had incorrectly assumed that because of his position, he could walk around with no PPE whatsoever. Fortunately the shop floor supervisor set him right and sent him to get properly suited up. [15:35] Data Centre security says no – Steve recalls a time when a member of top management went to visit one of their own data centre's, on getting to the gate the security had told him 'I don't care who you are, your name isn't on the list so you're not getting in.' That person hadn't gone through the process of being approved for entry. Yet, predictably, they sent complaints everywhere, but the head of the UK branch had quite rightly praised the security personnel for simply following protocol. [16:55] Private bank details? Don't mind if I do! – While Steve was auditing physcial security for an office, a printer ended up printing the payroll of every employee at the business. This wasn't in a private room, this was in the middle of the office, so anybody could walk up and see bank account details and salaries! When questioned, it turned out their Finance Director was working from home, and hadn't bothered to contacts anyone to retrieve the documents. So unsurprisingly, they received a non-conformity. [19:55] Do not goad the auditor - A bit of advice from Steve "Never say 'this is our most secure room' to an auditor" – that is essentially a challenge, and one that you'll likely lose if you don't follow your own processes. Steve put this to the test when someone had claimed only 3 people had access to a certain room. Out of curiosity, Steve used his visitor badge to gain entry, and asked if he was included in that 3. Obviously he wasn't, and this was simply down to access control being a bit muddled at that particular company. [21:25] Mistaken Identity: Steve recalls a time when he was given a visitors badge with a completely different person as the photograph. It had no effect on the correct access rights, but amusing all the same. He shares another story where he shared a waiting room with another Steve. When they called only the first name, the other Steve was taken into that business and questioned on ISO, to which the poor man had to inform them that he had no idea what they were talking about! Shortly after, the correct Steve was collected. But it goes to show how important it is to ensure you're giving access to the right people. [24:20] Battle of the Broomsticks: Ian recalls another time when working in construction, when he had the opportunity to work at a horse racecourse. They were looking to achieve what was OHSAS 18001 at the time (now known as ISO 45001), and it was going so well until a few new hires came running across the stable yard wielding 2 brooms, battling like gladiators in view of their auditor. Thankfully they weren't really harming each other, but it was enough for the auditor to raise a few questions about subcontractor controls. You really couldn't write the timing any better (or worse, I suppose!). [26:15] Clearly a certified forklift driver: While Steve was working at a warehouse, the manager there stressed how well trained all of their forklift drivers were, how sensible they all were. Though, Steve could see a person dancing, speeding and popping wheelies with his forklift over the managers shoulder. After he'd been alerted to the wannbe stunt driver, the manager went to have a word with them. [27:30] Accidents don't happen after 5pm: Ian was working at a company that highly valued the use of PPE on-site, everyone did a good job of abiding by that, until it came to the end of the day. One person leaves across the shop floor in just a normal t-shirt and jeans, waving them all off happily as he leaves for the day. He still had to cross the shop floor, and being off the clock doesn't make you invincible. [29:10] Fire Door Dramas: Steve recalls a time during an ISO 9001 audit where he spotted a fire door had been blocked by pallets in a warehouse. Another time he saw a fire door that was actually chained and padlocked! On another occasion, a local council had put their rubbish bins outside the fire door for the building, and during a fire drill, they couldn't get out. Ian states how many times he's seen signs ignored by drivers who park in front of fire exits. All this to say that a little awareness goes a long way. [31:10] Emergency Plans for the avid reader: During an incident at an NHS hospital where they'd suffered a long term major power outage, Ian and the staff had found that the emergency plans were 144 pages long! With Senior responsibilities hidden away in an Appendix on the last few pages. Well thought out plans are necessary, but the actual procedure needs to be something that can be followed in the event of an emergency. A little common sense should be applied when deciding what needs to be communicated. [34:00] Risk Assessment disaster: While working with a team in a manufacturing plant, Ian helped them to streamline their risk assessment process as their previous one needed too many signatures to actually go anywhere. This bottleneck was resolved with months of hard work, or so they thought… When it came to being audited, the auditor asked the team manager what happened to all of the risk assessments, he'd then pointed towards the Health & Safety Management and claimed they had them all, who had to admit that he didn't. Later that evening a director called the administration and asked to hide all of the documentation, to which she rightly refused to do. This also linked back to when the auditor had asked about how the apprentices were trained, and it happened that the apprentice supervisor was on holiday and so they were just let onto the shop floor. Suffice to say, this didn't reflect well on the resulting audit results. [36:30] Against the wire: Ian states that manufacturing companies are not famous for admin. He had one experience while trying to get a recertification booked in, which went up against the wire for their current certification running out. The CB obliged and sent a very qualified Health & Safety assessor there, who took them to pieces. It didn't take long for him to point out that they had a really nice management system with no commitment from managers to use it. A word to the wise – don't leave your recertification up until the last minute! If a CB tried to move your recertification past that expiry date, you can and should push back. [39:00] Password palavers: Steve shares an experience when he interviewed a very organised PA who managed 7 Directors. At the end of the audit he pointed out a folder on her computer called 'passwords', to which she obliged to show him the contents. Predictably it contained all the usernames and passwords for various accounts the Directors owned. She knew about the secure passwords policy, but no one could realistically remember that many! When Steve questioned the technical team, they states only selected people needed one, and she wasn't one of them. Steve pointed out that she did, and had done the best she could with the tools available, and gifted them a non-conformity as a result as they hadn't done a good job of ascertaining who should get additional security tools. By the end of that day, the PA had their own password vault. [41:30] A fire extinguisher as useless as a chocolate teapot: In another company Steve had noted that they still had a black fire extinguisher. When asked, the staff replied that they were all up-to-date as of 2007. On checking, it was revealed that it had last been serviced in August 1997 – so no, it was not in fact 'up-to-date'. It may be innocuous to some, but when it comes to safety equipment, that could be the difference between life and death in an emergency. [42:40] Technophobes in a modern age: Ian recounts a past quality audit he did for an engineering company. They require a lot of specific ISO Standards for that industry, and so the company paid a subscription service to ensure they had digital copies of all these Standards to refer back to. One such standard was on verification, and on asking a particular quality engineer about how he verifies a specific product, he pulls out a printed hard copy of a standard from 1993. Ian was interviewing him in 2017, there had been at least 2 updated versions of the Standard out by that point. When probed about why he wasn't using the online standards library paid for by the company, he simply stated 'I don't like computers'. [45:00] The case of the mysterious ghost file: Steve once had an audit with a relatively nervous member of staff, after explaining that all he has to do is explin how he works, the interview went rather smoothly. At one point he photocopied a bit of paper, hole punched it and filed it away on a shelf in the corner. Steve initially thought 'good admin, he's clearly following a process', so when he returned Steve asked why he filed that particular bit of information away, to which the staff member said 'I don't know, I've just been told to do it'. Steve then questioned the Quality Manager there about that document and they replied with the same. He then questioned the warehouse personnel to get the same answer. So, you have this document being photocopied over and over, filed away each time and no one knows why! Steve politely pointed out that it might be a good idea to rethink that pointless process. [47:50] Useless numbering systems: Ian had a similar experience with a numbering system that nobody knew the origins of. The staff involved simply shrugged it off and stated it was simply just what they used. Ian decided to put something to the test, by getting rid of it. He removed an entire archive system from a company's network folder, as back then file space was a big cost and concern. He kept the files and waited to see if anyone actually needed them. After months, he only had 2 requests for documents. It's important to ask both what is and isn't working well. Getting input from all levels of staff can be eye opening, and empower those employees who can help shape up company processes to work more efficiently. [49:50] Allergic to Audits: Ian shares a secondhand story where a trainer for the HSE was conducting a site visit, where he needed to question the shop supervisor on a few things. He asked him for something he couldn't see, and the guy agreed to go get it, and just never came back. Apparently he was so scared of the auditing process that he just went home! [54:00] Shady police and stolen cars: One of Steve's previous clients had an experience where what they thought was a policeman asked about a hire car the company owned, stating it had been involved in a crime. They didn't think much of letting him take it for his 'investigation'. Later when the hire company asked about getting their car back, the staff let them know what happened, rightly confused this led to a lot of discussion. As you can probably tell, the man was not a policeman and had made off with a nice shiny BMW simply by asking for it. If something like this happens to you, always ask for documentation from the police. [55:00] The Great Computer Caper: Ian recalls a training centre incident where a lot of computer equipment is stored in one suite. One day a few guys came in and started lifting stuff out, people were holding doors open for them, not at all thinking them to be thieves. Low and behold, they were and took everything. Steve recounts a very similar experience where the thieves posed as a computer service company, stripping the entire office on a Friday afternoon. It wasn't until Monday when everything was still gone that people thought to question who those people really were. Thank you all for a great 2024, we look forward to bringing you more ISO tips and success stories in 2025. We'd love to hear your views and comments about the ISO Show, here's how: ● Share the ISO Show on Twitter or Linkedin ● Leave an honest review on iTunes or Soundcloud. Your ratings and reviews really help and we read each one. Subscribe to keep up-to-date with our latest episodes: Stitcher | Spotify | YouTube |iTunes | Soundcloud | Mailing List

Join Graeme Richardson-Locke, Head of Associations & Technical Lead at FESPA, as he shares insights from the print industry's journey toward sustainable practices. He discusses the significant carbon footprint of international events and the challenges of implementing ISO 20121. Discover how FESPA tackled gap analysis, the benefits gained from sustainability certification, and their innovative strategies, including reducing carbon footprints with fiberboard use at trade fairs. Graeme emphasizes the importance of personal responsibility in environmental conservation.