A gauge passed its last calibration but fails the next one. By then, it may have been used on many parts, some of which may already have shipped.
How do you decide how far back to review the previous measurements for the impact assessment?
ISO 9001:2026 places greater emphasis on quality culture, but I wonder what tangible evidence of that will actually look like in practice.
It seems easy to have posters, signed acknowledgement forms, or other paperwork that says the right things without showing how people actually behave.
Someone stopping a shipment over a quality concern seems like a much stronger indication than paperwork alone.
What would you consider meaningful evidence of a quality culture?
Document control in a SharePoint folder, NCRs in one spreadsheet, calibration in another with conditional formatting. It can all work fine for a while and even get through audits.
Then a form gets revised, but the procedure that refers to it doesn't, and nothing tells you.
For those managing an ISO 9001 QMS, when did this kind of setup start becoming difficult to manage?
Was it headcount, number of sites, number of documents, or just too many things relying on one very organised person?