Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Background to AS 4269 & AS ISO 10002 Bill Dee Chair of drafting committees SOCAP Annual Symposium Manly, 15-17 August 2006.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Background to AS 4269 & AS ISO 10002 Bill Dee Chair of drafting committees SOCAP Annual Symposium Manly, 15-17 August 2006."— Presentation transcript:

1 Background to AS 4269 & AS ISO Bill Dee Chair of drafting committees SOCAP Annual Symposium Manly, August 2006

2 Topics Background behind AS 4269 & AS ISO Differences between AS 4269 & AS ISO 10002

3 Background behind AS 4269 & AS ISO Request for a standard on complaints handling came from NSW Law Society. Pressure from government and regulators on the professions in early 90’s to have effective complaints handling systems. Some indicia were emerging (e.g. visibility, accessibility) but no real consensus on the essential elements.

4 Background behind AS 4269 & AS ISO Standards Australia formed a committee in early 90’s to draft a standard. Made up of representatives from the regulators, professions, consumers and industry. The notion of essential elements grew out of the committee’s deliberations.

5 Background behind AS 4269 & AS ISO The essential elements set down outcomes that an organisation needed to achieve to have an effective complaints handling system. The guidance section was meant to do just that: it was hoped that innovation would develop with the standard in that format.

6 Background behind AS 4269 & AS ISO Standard published in First of its kind in the world. Has been embraced by regulators and industry based dispute resolution schemes, and companies as a set of objective criteria for complaints handling.

7 Background behind AS 4269 & AS ISO In the late 90’s ISO’s consumer policy advisory committee (COPOLCO) became interested in standards for the global market. This interest grew out of an emerging “black hole” in consumer protection particularly as some consumer transactions were being conducted over the net. COPOLCO requested ISO draft a standard on complaints handling

8 Background behind AS 4269 & AS ISO A working group was set up to draft the standard. Members from Canada, UK, Japan, Argentina, Australia. Source documents included AS 4269, UK & Argentinean Management Systems Standards, ISO 9000, Japanese standard and the Australian standard on compliance programs.

9 Background behind AS 4269 & AS ISO ISO published in July 2004 A Standards Australia committee was established to decide whether to “pick up” ISO as an Australian Standard. Committee agreed to this subject to some additional wording in the guiding principle on accessibility AS ISO published in April 2006

10 Differences between AS 4269 & AS ISO Many of the “essential elements” in AS 4269 are referred to in the “Guiding Principles” in AS ISO AS ISO has included “customer- focused approach” and “ continuous improvement” as guiding principles Structure of two standards different.

11 Differences between AS 4269 & AS ISO Much more guidance given in AS ISO than AS More logical flow in the new standard. Influence and relationship with quality standards and quality management systems in AS ISO

12 Differences between AS 4269 & AS ISO AS 4269 basically was the essential elements and guidance. AS ISO is made up of: Guiding principles Complaints handling framework Planning and design Operation of complaints handling process Maintenance & Improvement Annexes

13 Differences between AS 4269 & AS ISO Commitment : contained in both standards. In essential elements section of AS 4269 but in framework section of AS ISO Both acknowledge the role of top management. Fairness : covered as an essential element in AS However, the term Objectivity is used in AS ISO and there is detailed guidance on this topic in the new standard.

14 Differences between AS 4269 & AS ISO Resources : not a major heading in AS 4269 but covered in Planning and Design ( 6.4 in AS ISO 10002). Visibility: similar coverage in both standards. Accessibility : again similar coverage in both standards.

15 Differences between AS 4269 & AS ISO Responsiveness: similar treatment in both standards. Charges: similar in both standards. Remedies: More explicit treatment in AS 4269 ( 2.10, 3.10). Annexures D&E of AS ISO contain a list of possible remedy types.

16 Differences between AS 4269 & AS ISO Data collection: covered in both standards. Both standards talk about the need for all complaints should to be classified and then analysed to identify systematic, recurring and single incident problems and trends, and to help eliminate the underlying causes of complaints.

17 Differences between AS 4269 & AS ISO Accountability : covered in Essential Elements in AS 4269 and Guiding Principles in AS ISO but more guidance given in the former ( 2.13, 3.13). Review and continuous improvement: covered in old standard ( 2.14, 3.14) but a major point in AS ISO (8.6)

18 New areas of AS ISO Confidentiality : (Guiding Principle 4.7) Customer-focused: (Guiding Principle 4.8). Policy: ( Framework 5.2). Responsibility and authority: addresses these topics in some detail. Covers every tier of the organisation from Top Management down. Acknowledges the role of a complaints handling manager and her/his responsibilities vis-à-vis line managers

19 New areas of AS ISO Process:. Advice given on all aspects when a complaint comes to an organisation: receipt tracking acknowledgement assessment investigation response communication of decision closure


Download ppt "Background to AS 4269 & AS ISO 10002 Bill Dee Chair of drafting committees SOCAP Annual Symposium Manly, 15-17 August 2006."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google