What standards do I need for my product or service?

There are standards for most products and services. Sometimes dozens of them. Examples of standards for products: - Standards for connection to another product. - Safety standards. - Standard dimensions. - Standards with test methods to be able to demonstrate the quality of the product. Examples of standards for services: - Standards that lay down what service the customer may expect. - Requirements for staff training. - Standard procedures. Application of standards is sometimes compulsory or virtually compulsory because the law specifies this or because the customer requires it. But it may also be the company’s own choice to use standards, for example to save costs or to serve the customer better. Standards can determine whether a product or services flops or is a mega-success (click here for examples). Standards can provide a steer for a company to capture new markets and achieve better operating results. Click here for benefits of standardization for producers and buyers. The importance of standards and standardization continues to increase. If you would like to know how this comes about, click here. Searching for standards is difficult, as there are so many of them. The danger is that you can no longer see the wood for the trees. Set out below you will find a systematic approach for searching for standards for products and services. We assume that there is already an overall design of the product or service

Measuring societal impact of standards

Society faces existential challenges, such as global warming, demographic change and digital innovations. Standards help solving problems and reaping opportunities. They have long been recognised as important, from technological, business, and economic perspectives, but clear evidence about their societal impact is still missing.Against this background, the XXM Partners commissioned this project to get a clearer view of how standards impact society. The project was carried out by researchers from Eindhoven University of Technology and Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University between November 2021 and November 2022. We conducted a pre-study of 48 standards, reviewed academic literature on standards’ impact and its measurement. We carried out eight in-depth case studies of particular standards with 86 expert interviews, relevant documents, and other sources. In doing so, we reached all five goals that were agreed in the project contract:Goal 1: Overview over dimensions of standards impactsSocietal impact has many dimensions, which relate, e.g., to public health, education, or the environment. Our literature review identified the 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as the most suitable framework for our project. The SDGs are goals, agreed upon in global consensus, on which society should focus and improve. A growing global movement has formed around them to address societal challenges.In a pre-study, we conducted desk research to explore potential impacts of 48 standards. They cover the breadth of subject areas, and include standards with societal, environmental, technical and/or business purposes. We find that these standards can be linked to all SDGs. Often one standard affects multiple SDGs, going beyond intended impacts.Goal 2: Overview over scientific literature on standards’ impactsStandards are important for society. This is widely recognised in academic literature. However, there is relatively limited research on how they impact society. Most of this limited research focuses on two standards: ISO 9001 (quality management systems) and ISO 14001 (environmental management systems). Our review reveals a research focus on business/economic (both standards) and environmental (ISO 14001) impacts. Some evidence exists on non-environmental societal impacts (e.g., workplace safety), but this remains limited.We extended our review to other fields, especially addressing best practice for impact measurement. We compared multiple approaches, selected the Logic Model for understanding impact, and adapted it to standards. This model helps understand impact by tracing it in five steps: (1) inputs (including standards), (2) activities for standard implementation, (3) outputs (a situation reflecting what a standard prescribes), (4) outcomes (changes for stakeholders), and eventually (5) long-term impact.Goal 3: Evidence of standards’ societal impacts – empirical researchUnder the project team’s guidance, master students carried out eight in-depth studies in Norway (two studies), Sweden (two studies), Finland (two studies), Denmark and Austria. Standards were selected in consultation with the XXM Partners. They cover a broad range of important areas, e.g., greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reporting (ISO 14064-1), clinical trials for medical devices (ISO 14155), and information security management (ISO 27001).Our studies led to findings about (1) specific societal changes caused by the investigated standards, (2) what drives standards’ impacts in general, and (3) measuring standards’ impact (see Goal 4 below).Findings about standards’ specific societal changesTwo standards in our study are particularly successful in creating positive impact:• EN 16516 (emissions of construction products into indoor air) promotes the availability of low-emission construction products, thereby contributing to healthy indoor air.• ISO 14155 (clinical investigations for medical devices) contributes to safer clinical trials and availability of innovative medical devices for patients.In the other cases, we observe strong potential for positive societal impact. However, this is not achieved, e.g., due to standards not being implemented at large scale, not meeting potential users’ expectations, and/or competing with other standards. In two cases (ISO 14064-1, GHG emissions accounting; ISO 14044, life-cycle assessment), foreseeable abuse of the standard may even provide opportunities for greenwashing.All investigated standards have broader (potential) impacts on the SDGs than identified by ISO. E.g., ISO 14155 does not only contribute to SDG 3 (“Good Health and Wellbeing”), but also to SDG 9 (“Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure”) and the institutional aspect of SDG 16 (“Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions”).Findings about drivers behind standards’ impacts: importance of their ecosystemsAll investigated standards are deeply embedded in their ecosystems. A remarkable finding concerns the large extent, to which (mis)alignment with this context drives their impact. This also makes it challenging to isolate the standard’s impact from that of its entire ecosystem.Where we observed positive impact, this was largely due to a standard serving a clear purpose in its ecosystem (e.g., meeting market needs, supporting certification, alignment with regulatory requirements). In the cases where potentials for positive impact have not yet been realised, our data show how this is driven by misaligned ecosystems and standards. We have recommendations for how to address this (see Goal 5 below)Goal 4: Applied methodology for demonstrating societal impactsIn the course of the project, we developed a methodology for measuring standard’s societal impacts. It consists of a six-step process, which is based on four essential frameworks/tools:1. Stakeholder analysis,2. A checklist for analysing a standard’s ecosystem,3. The logic model for standards,4. The SDGs as a framework for classifying impact.We recommend this methodology for systematically studying further standards’ impacts.Goal 5: Recommendations to National Standard Bodies (NSBs)Our results have clear implications for the XXM Partners, ISO/IEC, CEN/CENELEC, and their members. Based on these implications, we provide recommendations on (1) communicating standards’ impacts to policymakers and other stakeholders, and (2) enhancing standards’ positive impact. Section 9.5 (p.102) specifies these recommendations in detail.Communicating standards’ impact• To policymakers: Emphasise standards’ functions as essential instruments for change in their respective ecosystems.• To other stakeholders: Focus on standards’ contributions to the SDGs, while acknowledging that the full potential is not yet achieved.• Ensure standards’ inclusion in frameworks for measuring societal impact: Engage in dialogue with the impact measurement community. Ensure that increasingly influential approaches to measuring societal impact include standards. This would support clearer communication about standards’ impacts and contribute to frameworks’ accuracy.Enhancing standards’ positive impact• Already address societal impacts during the standardisation process. We provide two tools, which may be used for this.• Improve standards’ relevance and quality in line with their ecosystems’ expectations (positioning standards relative to competing and/or complementary standards, clarity of requirements, quality of translations, withdrawing unused standards).• Need for future research in six directions: (1) Studies at the level of standard families and/or ecosystems. (2) Large-scale replication. (3) Understanding standard competition. (4) Reflecting ongoing developments in impact measurement. (5) Effects of societal change on standards’ role in society. (6) Starting from the “grand- societal challenges”.ConclusionOur work makes a novel contribution to knowledge about standards’ impacts. By doing so, we offer concrete insights, which the XXM Partners can use in communicating the benefits of standards. We also identify key factors affecting standards’ societal impacts, and offer tools and methods that are relevant for practitioners and researchers alike. The XXM Partners can use these insights in their work to further maximise standards’ value to society, and limit any potential negative effects

Open Standards and Government Policy: Results of a Delphi Survey

In an increasing number of countries governments consider to stimulate the role of open standards in public Information and Communication Technology (ICT) infrastructure development. The aim of this work is to identify important issues related to government policy with regard to open standards and the development of public ICT infrastructure. This multi-method research presents results from an exploratory literature review and multi-round Delphi survey of key experts in the field of standardization

Combining economic and social goals in the design of production systems by using ergonomics standards

In designing of production systems, economic and social goals can be combined, if ergonomics is integrated into the design process. More than 50 years of ergonomics research and practice have resulted in a large number of ergonomics standards for designing physical and organizational work environments. This paper gives an overview of the 174 international ISO and European CEN standards in this field, and discusses their applicability in design proces

Effect of patellar strap and sports tape on jumper's knee symptoms:Protocol of a randomised controlled trial

AbstractIntroductionPatellar straps or sports tapes are commonly used by athletes with patellar tendinopathy in order to reduce pain and to continue sports participation. Currently, there is no scientific evidence for the effectiveness of a patellar strap or sports tape in the management of this common injury.AimTo investigate the effect of the use of a patellar strap and sports tape on pain and sports participation in subjects with patellar tendinopathy.DesignThe study is divided into two parts: a randomised controlled crossover experiment and a randomised controlled trial (parallel group design).Participants and setting140 patients diagnosed with patellar tendinopathy recruited from sports medical centres and physiotherapist practices.InterventionIn the first part of the study, participants serve as their own control by performing three functional tests under four different conditions (patellar strap, sports tape, placebo tape, and no orthosis). In the second part, participants keep a log for two weeks (control week and intervention week) about the pain experienced during and after sports and their level of sports participation. In the intervention week participants will use the orthosis assigned to them during training and competition.MeasurementsThe amount of pain (both parts of the study) and sports participation (second part only) will be measured.AnalysisTo analyse the effects of the orthoses a Linear Mixed Model will be used.DiscussionThe knowledge gained in this study can be used by practitioners in their advice for athletes with patellar tendinopathy about using patellar strap and sports tape during sports

Diagnostic accuracy of qPCR and microscopy for cutaneous leishmaniasis in rural Ecuador: A Bayesian latent class analysis

Precisión diagnóstica; Leishmaniasis cutánea; Ecuador ruralPrecisió diagnòstica; Leishmaniosi cutània; Equador ruralDiagnostic accuracy; Cutaneous leishmaniasis; Rural EcuadorBackground Clinical and laboratory diagnosis of cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) is hampered by under-ascertainment of direct microscopy. Methods This study compared the diagnostic accuracy of qPCR on DNA extracted from filter paper to the accuracy of direct smear slide microscopy in participants presenting with a cutaneous lesion suspected of leishmaniasis to 16 rural healthcare centers in the Ecuadorian Amazon and Pacific regions, from January 2019 to June 2021. We used Bayesian latent class analysis to estimate test sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios (LR), and predictive values (PV) with their 95% credible intervals (95%CrI). The impact of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics on predictive values was assessed as a secondary objective. Results Of 320 initially included participants, paired valid test results were available and included in the diagnostic accuracy analysis for 129 from the Amazon and 185 from the Pacific region. We estimated sensitivity of 68% (95%CrI 49% to 82%) and 73% (95%CrI 73% to 83%) for qPCR, and 51% (95%CrI 36% to 66%) and 76% (95%CrI 65% to 86%) for microscopy in the Amazon and Pacific region, respectively. In the Amazon, with an estimated disease prevalence among participants of 73%, negative PV for qPCR was 54% (95%CrI 5% to 77%) and 44% (95%CrI 4% to 65%) for microscopy. In the Pacific, (prevalence 88%) the negative PV was 34% (95%CrI 3% to 58%) and 37% (95%CrI 3% to 63%). The addition of qPCR parallel to microscopy in the Amazon increases the observed prevalence from 38% to 64% (+26 (95%CrI 19 to 34) percentage points). Conclusion The accuracy of either qPCR on DNA extracted from filter paper or microscopy for CL diagnosis as a stand-alone test seems to be unsatisfactory and region-dependent. We recommend further studies to confirm the clinically relevant increment found in the diagnostic yield due to the addition of qPCR