Our supplier messed up and I sent them a SCAP, but our buyer also wants a CAP from us. How do I document root cause being supplier error? They sent us a certification of compliance that said they had properly treated the products, but upon testing by the buyer, they were not correct. We sent the product back to the supplier to be redone. How do I handle the CAR on our end?
ISO 9001:2026 came out on 16 September. I've been going through it next to the 2015 text, and this is the plain version of what's different.
Good news first. It's still clauses 4 to 10, the process approach is still the process approach, PDCA is still there. If your 2015 system works, you're not rebuilding it.
| Clause | 2015 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|
| 4.1 / 4.2 | Climate added by the 2024 amendment | Climate is now in the standard; you decide which interested-party requirements the QMS covers |
| 5.1.1 | Leadership and commitment | Adds promoting quality culture and ethical behaviour |
| 6.1 | Risks and opportunities together | Split into 6.1.1 to 6.1.3, each analysed and evaluated |
| 6.3 | Planning of changes | Adds communication, monitoring and review of results |
| 7.1.6 | Knowledge to operate processes | Knowledge for the whole QMS: retain, apply, share |
| 9.2.2 | Audit criteria and scope | Adds objectives for each audit |
| 9.3 | Management review | Adds changes in interested-party needs; risks and opportunities reviewed separately |
| 10.1 / 10.3 | Two clauses | One clause, 10.1 |
| Clause 3 | Points to ISO 9000 | Core terms listed; ISO 9000 still the reference |
| Annexes | Annex A and B | Annex A expanded, Annex B removed |
I'd look at 6.1 first. Opportunities used to share a clause with risks, and in plenty of systems that meant a risk register and one sentence about opportunities. Now they get their own subclauses, and management review looks at both separately. If you can't point to one opportunity you evaluated, acted on and reviewed, that's a finding waiting to happen.
6.3 is quieter but I think it catches more people. Planning a change isn't enough anymore. You have to communicate it, watch how it performs, and review the result. My guess is plenty of change templates stop at approval.
5.1.1 is the one I'm curious about. You can't audit a poster, so how do you audit quality culture? I'd expect auditors to lean on how managers actually handled a reported quality problem.
The rest is small. Audit objectives in 9.2.2 are an easy fix, and the improvement clauses merging mostly means updating references.
On timing, the transition period is three years and the date I keep seeing is 30 September 2029. Your certification body will confirm yours. I'd ask early, because they'll all be running transition audits at the same time.
Which change surprised you most, and which one looks like the mountain of work for your team?
Is anyone else preparing for the ISO 9001:2026 Lead Implementer or Lead Auditor program?