A new standard is needed! Role playing helps to understand standardization and conformity

If a workshop begins at 9 a.m., then it usually makes sense to arrive the day before – especially given the weather conditions that we all experienced in mid-January. And if all the participants arrive a day earlier, then a good opportunity is provided to get to know each other in a relaxed atmosphere.

Over pizza, pasta, and salad, the twelve participants of the first Conformity Assessment Bootcamp sat together in the evening in snowy Bonn, discussing professional matters, shared memories of past Next Generation DKE meetings and, of course, private matters (the most popular question was: who had the most snow? The question also clarified who had traveled from where).

The first Conformity Assessment Bootcamp was organized by Next Generation DKE in cooperation with International Product Safety GmbH.

The following day was kicked off by Heribert Schorn, Managing Director and Technical Director of International Product Safety GmbH (I2PS) in Bonn. Schorn is also Chairman of the international committee IEC/TC 42 and a member of the IEC Conformity Assessment Board (IEC CAB). The round of introductions quickly showed that conformity assessment is an issue for almost every company. The railway sector, batteries, and air-conditioning technology – the spheres of activities and experience of the various participants were quite diverse, so that everyone was able to contribute their own perspectives to the discussions and breakout sessions.

Dr. Annette Frederiksen, honorary head of Next Generation DKE, then presented the Next Generation DKE program. She emphasized that there is something for everyone who wants to become active in standardization or with the Young Professionals. The offerings range from short sessions such as the regular standardization get-together to lifelong learning and support such as the mentoring program. And they also offer a great opportunity to make new contacts and expand your own network.

But what exactly is “conformity assessment”? Heribert Schorn used this question to get the technical part of the workshop off to a start. In order to move from the abstract to the concrete, Schorn asked the group: “How do you make your own purchasing decisions?” The penny had dropped: brand awareness, a pleasant experience or maybe even recommendations from friends, acquaintances or test reports. In essence, it’s always about trust. “Trust” was the term that was to be used more frequently on this particular day, as conformity assessment creates trust among the stakeholders involved.

Schorn explained the interaction between standards and conformity assessment: experts ensure quality by publishing an international standard on the basis of consensus with the aim of ensuring safety and security. Conformity assesses the risk. Thus, for example, it examines whether a product (or service) meets the requirements of the standards to be considered. If this is the case, then the risk for this product (or service) is minimized – and this in turn creates trust.

Schorn’s first conclusion, “We all carry out numerous conformity assessments every single day” was met with silence. “You don’t believe me? Well, go to the supermarket tomorrow and stand at the fruit counter. What criteria do you use to choose apples? – based your own requirements of course. That is, only if an apple meets our criteria – big, red and juicy, for example. Then we buy it. And if not, then we leave it.” Schorn knows how to explain things in simple terms. That becomes clear again and again.

Become part of the Next Generation DKE!

Working in standardization offers newcomers in particular a large network with many international contacts and career opportunities as well as opportunities for professional exchange. If you want to get involved in the Next Generation DKE, the DKE provides a wide range of support, e.g. by enabling you to participate in high-caliber events such as the IEC General Meeting.

The first breakout session followed after all of the participants were given an initial introduction to the world of conformity assessment. In a fictitious scenario, a “baby robot” is launched on the market. The task was to consider who needs a standard in this regard, why one is required at all, and what problems might arise between the respective market players as a result of their varying interests. A Committee Draft for Voting (CDV) that was already available represents the final phase in the standardization process in which comments on an IEC standard can be taken into consideration. The participants were each assigned a role with which they were to put forward their own arguments – manufacturers, test laboratories, consumers and several others were represented in the role playing.

Consumers only want safe products. The manufacturer wants a local standard because it is simpler, faster and cheaper. Some countries want to import the product, but in some cases they do not have the resources in order to develop a standard themselves and therefore advocate an international IEC standard. Owing to their independence, testing facilities insist on a third-party audit because that is how they earn their money. The world is simply complex – and complicated.

45 minutes - it was a wild discussion. Heribert Schorn laughs and comments: "There's a cheat sheet for the role play in case the discussion doesn't get going. I can tear that up for you."

Benjamin Johann, who is part of Heribert Schorn’s team at I2PS, calmed down the group with his presentation and the discussion was then continued later in the afternoon. Johann explained to the group what the risk level means in the context of conformity assessment. Put simply: a computer mouse poses a relatively low risk. In this case, a manufacturer’s declaration is sufficient. An oil refinery, on the other hand, poses a relatively high risk. In this case, testing and certification is required. And not just with regard to the products, but practically everything that can be tested and certified – including staff, equipment and processes. And not just from the oil refinery, but also those of external service providers.

After lunch the group was given a tour of the I2PS test laboratory before continuing with the second breakout session. The discussion focused on the questions of what the “baby robot” is intended for, what level of risk might be appropriate and which IEC conformity assessment system(s) should then be considered. Comparisons were made with films like “M3GAN” and “I, Robot”. Whether or not Elon Musk should face similar questions with his humanoid robot Optimus was also discussed. The answer was a clear yes.

Raymond Puppan, DKE Senior Principal Expert for Conformity Assessment, picked up on the lively conversation and posed several provocative questions with regard to the legal aspects: “If I, as an entrepreneur, claim to have complied with valid standards in the event of damage, am I liable at all? And what does “legal” actually mean in this context?” The group clearly enjoyed both his questions and drawing their conclusions.

The results of the breakout session in the afternoon were presented before the final round began. All of the participants shared their personal feedback with regard to the Conformity Assessment Bootcamp with the group. The open discussions, the breakout sessions, the tour of the testing laboratory and the format as such were particularly well received. In the end, everyone agreed that “conformity” – a rather difficult topic to get a handle on – was communicated in a playful, simple and understandable way.

It was a day packed with application-relevant information, exciting discussions and a good dose of humor. With the DKE training courses for experts, Raymond Puppan offered further points of contact for any unanswered questions so that the topic of conformity assessment could be delved into further for those who are interested. Heribert Schorn shared a few words with the participants at the end before everyone headed home: “Standards and conformity are like two sides of the same coin – one cannot exist without the other and is of no value on its own. Please keep this in mind and get home safely.”

So, how did you like the Conformity Assessment Bootcamp?

“The role playing was a powerful, practical exercise, reminiscent of real meetings.” (Benjamin Johann)

“I got the most out of the role playing because so many different perspectives were revealed.” (Michael Fiege)

“I really enjoyed it today. I will recommend the Bootcamp to my colleagues.” (Mohammad Maleki)

“Today really got me interested, so I’d like to do more with conformity assessment and delve deeper into the topic.” (Michael Dopichaj)