Standards are good, but are they essential?

08/01/2003

The column "All standards are not created equal..." (CleanRooms, April 2003, pg. 11) only addresses a part of a much bigger issue. I dare say that not only are all standards not created equal, but some may not even be necessary.

Beyond the primary weights and measures, most other standards are merely a good thing—good, but not necessarily essential.

There is solid history to this added caveat. The U.S., though the earliest signatory to the grand daddy of them all—the metric system—has thumbed its nose at the metric system and is none the worse for it.

The absence of ISO 9000 registration in the early 1990s did not make Japanese cars or watches suddenly inferior to European products of registered manufacturers. In my opinion, a standard will no more make a better product or process than a new tape measure will make one a better carpenter.

This is particularly true when the attempted standard is developed to be more universal. In this case, a wider audience quite often requires that standards satisfy the "politics" of the moment rather than the pure science.

So, I say that standards are just a good thing, but not always essential. In fact, most major standards recognize this by allowing the "buyer" to opt out. Ultimately, buyers should be judicious in the use of any standard.

I commend the continuing efforts of the authors in adding a balance in the promotion of any new standard.

Dr. R. Vijaykumar
Vice President of Technology, Air Techniques International