6 replies to this topic

[Simon]

'Dynamic' launching of work on ISO 26000 - future guideline on social responsibility

"Dynamic!" That was how the Brazil-Sweden leadership team of the ISO Working Group on Social Responsibility (WG SR) described its first meeting to launch the development of the future ISO 26000 standard giving SR guidelines, for publication in 2008.

"As well as giving a focus to the development of the SR standard by providing it with a designation, ISO 26000, this first meeting was the scene for the essential first phase of 'team forming' which must take place before 'team performing' can swing into action," commented ISO Secretary-General Alan Bryden.

The meeting, held on 7-11 March 2005, in Salvador, Bahia, Brazil, was the "kick-off" of ISO's first venture into the area of SR and, fittingly for a new initiative, achieved a high attendance and set a fresh benchmark for innovation in stakeholder participation.

Read Full Press Release:
'Dynamic' launching of work on ISO 26000 - future guideline on social responsibility

Regards,
Simon

[Simon]

Latest press release from ISO on ISO 26000.

ISO lays the foundations of ISO 26000 guidance standard on social responsibility

[Kat]

The latest news:

http://www.iso.org/i...06/Ref1010.html


The building of international consensus on voluntary guidance to help organizations operate in a socially responsible way made progress at the recent meeting of the ISO group that is developing the future ISO 26000 standard on social responsibility.

Some 320 people from 55 countries and 26 international organizations attended the third plenary meeting of the ISO Working Group on Social Responsibility (WG SR) on 15-19 May 2006 in Lisbon, Portugal.

[allanj]

One does not know whether to laugh or cry at the idea of this standard/ guideline - whatever it may finally be called.

Is there not something wrong in today's world when someone actually thinks this topic needs a standard? Do they actually think it will be of use or adherred to?

Mankind already has enough texts on this matter as well as sage guidance that has existed foir centuries. a.k.a. The Bible; The Koran etc. And we also have the United Nations which is supposed to have its Declaration of Human Rights. Lok at any number off the great philosophical works readily available in your local library or bookshop. And there is also enough material available on the 'web.

The Golden Rule says all that is needed when it comes to "Social Responsibility" and I cannot believe a committee will do any better.

So we witness yet another committee of clowns, taken with their own feelings of self-importance, appointed by who knows, accountable to no one, wallowing in their personal views about the seriousness of their discussions, playing internal politics about what their own countries might accept, wordsmithing and boondoggling around the world to attend meetings.

And in the end who will benefit? Wait for it. Will this only become another nonsensical assignment for registrars to perpetuate their existence and boost theeir cash flow? Another opportunity for the IQA/ ASQ et al to make money out of pointless registration schemes, training courses and all the other superfluous paraphernalia with which we are so familiar?

It would all be be wonderful fodder for modern day satirical shows such as That Was The Week That Was, or perhaps Monty Python.

[Simon]

OK I'll bite.

First off I advise laughing, faced with the choice it is the preferable option; although I do see your dilemma Allan.

From ISO:

ISO, the International Organization for Standardization, has decided to launch the development of an International Standard providing guidelines for social responsibility (SR).

The guidance standard will be published in 2008 as ISO 26000 and be voluntary to use. It will not include requirements and will thus not be a certification standard.
There is a range of many different opinions as to the right approach ranging from strict legislation at one end to complete freedom at the other. We are looking for a golden middle way that promotes respect and responsibility based on known reference documents without stifling creativity and development.

Our work will aim to encourage voluntary commitment to social responsibility and will lead to common guidance on concepts, definitions and methods of evaluation.
The need for organizations in both public and private sectors to behave in a socially responsible way is becoming a generalized requirement of society. It is shared by the stakeholder groups that are participating in the WG SR to develop ISO 26000: industry, government, labour, consumers, nongovernmental organizations and others, in addition to geographical and gender-based balance.

So initially not a certifiable standard, but I'm sure there will be plenty of revenue generated from courses, consultants, seminars and 26k standard sales.

I can also see the likes of Mark's and Spencer pushing it down suppliers throats as a cheap and easy way to show due diligence and avoid scandal. From the comfort of their ivory towers they will be able to demonstrate that the cheap clothing they buy from the Far East has been produced ‘ethically' and without imprisoning or beating any employees - which is nice. Blood spatters don't look good on a size 18 pleated skirt in cerise.


But do we think ISO 26000 will get rid of sweatshops in countries where employment law is poor or in countries where employee law is strong but people choose to ignore it? I doubt it, but is that the intention of this standard?


By the way Allan your splendid cynicism of 26k is matched only by your impressive loathing of the Certification industry.


Regards,
Simon

[BVRC]

I can definately see the benefit of this standard. I am involved in social auditing in South Africa and the social welfare of farm workers is most developed countries are still an issue of contention.

Sure there will be some parties that will benefit financially, but for these workers it will mean a improvement in their welfare on a very primary level, which will have far reaching effect in terms of the community....

[Simon]

I can definately see the benefit of this standard. I am involved in social auditing in South Africa and the social welfare of farm workers is most developed countries are still an issue of contention.

Sure there will be some parties that will benefit financially, but for these workers it will mean a improvement in their welfare on a very primary level, which will have far reaching effect in terms of the community....

Hi Bennii, I made that post over a year ago; I was especially cynical in those days. I'm all better now.

Does anyone know how well ISO 26000 is spreading?

Regards,
Simon