The transition to the 2026 standard
The transition can be framed around five important questions. Each needs an owner and each requires collaboration. This blog is part three of our series for leaders on the changes needed to maintain an effective management system.
This is part two of a series, for part one and part three, you know what to do!
Question 1. Have we determined whether climate change is relevant?
Climate change is now incorporated into the main text dealing with organisational context. Organisations must consider whether it is a relevant external issue, while interested parties may also have climate-related requirements.
This does not mean every organisation needs an elaborate climate programme. It means leadership must make a considered determination based on the organisation’s circumstances.
Relevant issues might include:
- disruption to suppliers or transport;
- extreme-weather effects on facilities or service delivery;
- customer sustainability expectations;
- insurance or contractual requirements;
- changing statutory or regulatory requirements;
- availability of materials; or
- resilience of infrastructure.
Evidence could include a context review, management-review discussion, risk assessment or strategic-planning record. The important point is that the conclusion is reasoned and connected to the QMS where relevance is identified.
Leadership engagement prevents this from becoming a generic statement added to a context register. Top management can ensure the assessment reflects actual commercial, operational and customer considerations.
Question 2. Which interested-party requirements will the QMS address?
The 2015 edition required organisations to identify relevant interested parties and their relevant requirements. The 2026 revision clarifies the need to determine which of those requirements the QMS will address.
This requires judgement. Customers, regulators, employees, owners, suppliers, certification bodies and other parties may have many expectations, but not all of them belong within the QMS.
Top management should ensure that the decision is:
- consistent with the organisation’s purpose and strategic direction;
- supported by legal, contractual and operational information;
- translated into appropriate controls or objectives; and
- reviewed when circumstances change.
An interested-party register can provide evidence, but the register must show more than a list of names. It should explain the relevant requirement, whether it will be addressed through the QMS, how it will be addressed and who is responsible.
Question 3. Can leaders demonstrate quality culture and ethical behaviour?
Quality culture and ethical behaviour are among the most important additions in ISO 9001:2026. Leadership is expected to promote them, and awareness requirements extend these expectations to relevant personnel. Quality culture and ethical behaviour are also recognised as factors that may influence the work environment.
A statement in the quality policy is not enough. Auditors are likely to look for consistent evidence across leadership actions, communication and workforce awareness.
Leaders should consider:
- whether unrealistic targets encourage shortcuts;
- whether employees can raise concerns without inappropriate pressure;
- whether customer and compliance requirements are protected when schedules are tight;
- whether mistakes are hidden or examined constructively;
- whether leaders follow the same controls they expect others to follow; and
- whether ethical expectations are understood in practical workplace situations.
Evidence may include leadership communications, induction material, meeting records, employee interviews, decision records and examples of management responding appropriately to quality or ethical concerns.
This is where the multiplier effect is most visible. Employees observe what leaders tolerate, reward, question and correct. Those observations shape culture more powerfully than slogans.
Question 4. Are risks and opportunities managed with comparable discipline?
The 2026 revision separates risks and opportunities more clearly. Both require structured consideration, action and evaluation of effectiveness.
Many organisations already maintain a risk register but treat opportunities as informal suggestions. That approach may no longer provide convincing evidence that opportunities are systematically considered and acted upon.
Leadership should ensure that significant opportunities are:
- identified from context, performance information and stakeholder needs;
- analysed and evaluated;
- assigned to an accountable owner;
- supported with appropriate resources;
- integrated into relevant processes; and
- reviewed to determine whether the intended benefit was achieved.
Examples could include automation, supplier development, process simplification, new competence, improved customer communication or a more reliable method of service delivery.
Risk management should also consider continuity of supply during and after disruption, where relevant.
The role of top management is to establish an appropriate balance. A system focused only on avoiding failure may become resistant to innovation, while a system focused only on opportunities may expose the organisation to unacceptable risk.
Question 5. Do QMS changes achieve their intended results?
ISO 9001:2015 already required planned consideration of QMS changes. The 2026 revision strengthens this by addressing communication, monitoring, evaluation and review of results.
Changes may include:
- introducing new technology;
- restructuring a process;
- changing a supplier;
- opening or relocating a site;
- modifying responsibilities;
- introducing a new product or service;
- changing an inspection method; or
- replacing a critical information system.
Leadership should not regard approval as the end of change management. A change can be implemented on schedule and still fail to deliver its intended result.
A strong change record should show the purpose, risks, responsibilities, resources, communication requirements, success measures, authorisation and post-implementation review. Most importantly, top management should ask: What evidence demonstrates that the change worked?
Conclusion
The defining feature of an effective QMS is not the number of procedures it contains. It is the extent to which the system influences decisions and behaviour.
Top management creates the multiplier effect. When leaders use the QMS to establish direction, allocate resources, evaluate change, balance risk and opportunity, reinforce ethical behaviour and pursue improvement, those practices spread through the organisation.
When leaders remain detached, that detachment also multiplies.
To achieve and sustain a third-party certified management system, leadership should focus on five central questions:
- Is climate change relevant to the organisation and its QMS?
- Which interested-party requirements will the QMS address?
- Can leadership demonstrate a genuine quality culture and ethical behaviour?
- Are risks and opportunities evaluated, acted upon and reviewed effectively?
- Do organisational changes achieve their intended results?
The strongest evidence will not be a newly written statement. It will be alignment between what leaders say, what they decide, what employees understand, how processes operate and what results the organisation achieves.
That is the real test of leadership. It is also the foundation of a QMS that is ready not only to pass a third-party audit, but to remain effective after the certificate has been issued.
If you are looking to improve your business outcomes, then a Proven Safety Solution may be what you need. If you have any specific aspects, you’d like more information on or if you have further questions, reach out by Clicking Here!
