Clause 5.4.1 of ISO 9001 requires that organisations "establish" quality objectives, and that these objectives "shall be measurable and consistent with the Quality Policy". Fair enough, but saying it doesn't make it happen. That's why we've got this additional requirement within clause 5.4.2 (QMS Planning) that states that planning "shall be carried out" in order to meet the requirements of the quality objectives. In other words, we set a target to achieve something then we put a plan in place for managing the job. What could be simpler? Well, lots apparently. How often do we encounter the vaguest of QMS objectives to "strive" for this and "endeavor to achieve" that, generally unsupported by any kind of rational plan or measurable progress towards it? It's a common problem, and more often than not, not picked up during a third party audit

Strange thing is that there is a similar coupling of requirements in OHSAS 18001 with regard to OHS objectives and planning (clause 4.3.3), but the failure to identify meaningful objectives and to support the objectives with a plan is much less of a weakness in that discipline. It is relatively uncommon to encounter vague and meaningless OHS objectives, or to find there is no method for working towards them. Why is that? Is it that the penny has dropped better and farther with OHS people? Are they cleverer than "Quality" people? Does the training that OHS people tend to go through (IOSH, NEBOSH or whatever) emphasise this planning discipline more effectively? Or is it down to the fact that the requirement is consolidated within a single cohesive clause, so it is harder to overlook or wriggle out of?

We don't know what the answer is, but it does seem that the matter has been recognised and an attempt to address the weakness will be made within ISO 9001:2008. 

That's a good thing, surely? Unfortunately, again, saying it doesn't make it happen. Shame that, otherwise we'd all be quids in. Let's wait and see what the plan looks like before we get too excited