Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- articles:a_matter_of_risk [2019/11/17 18:49] – [ISO/IEC Directives-Part 1. Annex L (originally Annex SL)] rrandall
+++ articles:a_matter_of_risk [2019/11/17 19:03] – [Conclusion] rrandall
@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 According to ISO JTCG N359, "//JTCG Frequently Asked Questions in support of Annex SL//" (dated 2013-12-03), in response to the “//Report of the ISO TMB Ad Hoc Group on Management Systems Standards//” (dated 10 February, 2006), the "Technical Management Board (TMB)" formed the "//Joint Technical Co-ordination Group on Management System Standards//" (TAG13-JTCG, or JTCG) to develop the future vision and guidelines for "//aligning//" future editions of its current management system standards (MSS), and for any new MSS. While the original scope of the JTCG was to standardize the "structure" of ISO MSSs, the JTCG requested permission to include "some" common content. This scope expansion was approved by the TMB, which led to the JTCG introducing Annex SL for inclusion to the 2012 edition of the [[https://www.iso.org/sites/directives/current/part1/index.xhtml|ISO/IEC Directives-Part 1]].
-[[https://www.iso.org/sites/directives/current/part1/index.xhtml|ISO/IEC Directives-Part 1]], Annex SL prescribes how ISO Management System Standard (MSS) standards //should// be structured and, much to the ire of some Technical Committee (TC) members, includes some "mandatory" standard content. The [[https://www.iso.org/sites/directives/current/part1/index.xhtml|ISO/IEC Directives-Part 1]]:2019 edition was restructured to  (1) rename "Annex SL" to "Annex L" and (2) expand the scope of Annex L to include IEC management system standards (many of whom had been, and remain, resistant to adopting the new structure and/or common content).
+[[https://www.iso.org/sites/directives/current/part1/index.xhtml|ISO/IEC Directives-Part 1]], Annex SL prescribes how ISO Management System Standard (MSS) standards //should// be structured and, much to the ire of some Technical Committee (TC) members, includes some "mandatory" //common// content. The [[https://www.iso.org/sites/directives/current/part1/index.xhtml|ISO/IEC Directives-Part 1]]:2019 edition was restructured to  (1) rename "Annex SL" to "Annex L" and (2) expand the scope of Annex L to include IEC management system standards (many of whom had been, and remain, resistant to adopting the new structure and/or common content).
 [[https://www.iso.org/sites/directives/current/part1/index.xhtml|ISO/IEC Directives-Part 1]]:2019 is divided into two main parts: \\
@@ Line 313: / Line 313: @@
 ===== Conclusion =====
-One must wonder why ISO is so obsessed with redefining the word "risk"?
+One must wonder why ISO is so obsessed with ignoring the etymology of the word "risk", and insisting upon redefining the word.
 Upon examining the "Bibliography" section of many ISO documents promoting non-traditional definitions of "risk", we see that they only reference ISO or IEC documents (IEC ([[https://www.iec.ch|International Electrotechnical Commission]]) is a sister organization of ISO):
@@ Line 323: / Line 323: @@
   * ISO Guide 73:2009 (only references other ISO & IEC documents)
-It quickly becomes obvious that ISO is firmly entrenched in "Not Invented Here Syndrome" (NIHS). [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_invented_here|Wikipedia]] describes NIHS as a stance adopted by social, corporate, or institutional cultures that avoids using or buying already existing products, research, standards, or knowledge because of their external origins and costs, such as royalties. The reasons for not wanting to use the work of others are varied, but some can include a desire to support a local economy instead of paying royalties to a foreign license-holder, fear of patent infringement, lack of understanding of the foreign work, an unwillingness to acknowledge or value the work of others, jealousy, belief perseverance, or forming part of a wider turf war. As a social phenomenon, this tendency can manifest itself as an unwillingness to adopt an idea or product because it originates from another culture, a form of tribalism.
+It quickly becomes obvious that ISO is firmly entrenched in "//Not Invented Here Syndrome//" (NIHS). [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_invented_here|Wikipedia]] describes NIHS as a stance adopted by social, corporate, or institutional cultures that avoids using or buying already existing products, research, standards, or knowledge because of their external origins and costs, such as royalties. The reasons for not wanting to use the work of others are varied, but some can include a desire to support a local economy instead of paying royalties to a foreign license-holder, fear of patent infringement, lack of understanding of the foreign work, an unwillingness to acknowledge or value the work of others, jealousy, belief perseverance, or forming part of a wider turf war. As a social phenomenon, this tendency can manifest itself as an unwillingness to adopt an idea or product because it originates from another culture, a form of tribalism.