>SHOP

keep my inbox inspiring

Sign up to our monthly newsletter for exclusive news and trends

Follow us on all channels

Start following us for more content, inspiration, news, trends and more

The benefits and implications of international standards
News

The benefits and implications of international standards

Monday, 15 July 2013
By Louis Nardin
close
Editor Image
Louis Nardin
Journalist and consultant

“Audacity, more audacity, always audacity.”

Georges Jacques Danton

“A quality watch is a concentration of creativity, rare technical and scientific skills, and age-old gestures. It appeals to the desire for uniqueness and distinction; it is a badge of knowledge, power and taste. A watch has many stories to tell; the details and secrets provide the relish”.

Read More

CLOSE
6 min read

Thanks to them, watchmakers speak the same language. While standards have had a considerable influence on quality, they can also be a key facet of brand strategy.

Tokyo was the host city, last May, for the 21st ISO/TC 114 international conference. Not a code name but the title given to the committee tasked with drafting and updating international standards for horology. Several delegations attended the conference, including from Switzerland. These meetings of volunteer specialists date back to 1964 and lay the international framework for 32 precisely defined standards. Since then, they have enabled the eleven participating countries to reach agreements on subjects as diverse as chronometric precision, water-resistance and magnetism. Other standards exist alongside the ISO ones, and all share the same objective: to provide a platform for discussion and improve product quality. Here’s why…

“A standard establishes the criteria against which something is measured, and how it is measured,” explains René LeCoultre, who was head of standards at the Federation of the Swiss Watch Industry (FH) from 1962 to 1970. “The aim is that everyone should be speaking the same language.”

Swiss watchmaking began working in this direction in the early 1920s through the Association Suisse de Normalisation, a body that gave rise to Switzerland’s NIHS standards. The objective back then was to reach a common agreement on the shape and size of parts, screws, for example, which would facilitate and improve manufacturing processes. After-sales services were also in need of uniform parts to work more efficiently. In 1962, an independent French/German/Swiss commission drafted new standards in four areas: functional jewels, shock-resistance, water-resistance and magnetism. Shortly after they were incorporated into a global system when the ISO/TC committee was established in 1964.

China frequently sends delegates to Switzerland to learn how we develop our standards.
Patrick Loetscher
Protect against risks

“Quality-related standards were introduced to protect against risks such as humidity. They were devised to reflect consumer lifestyles and provide basic guarantees,” comments René LeCoultre. The concept is still the same today. “It’s essential that watchmakers all over the world have a single frame of reference,” explains Patrick Loetscher, the FH’s current head of standards. “It enables us to keep track of major developments worldwide. It also avoids having to go back over each criterion from scratch. Under the ISO international system, for example, each standard is re-examined every five years.”

An ISO standard begins with a proposal made by a member-country (an identical process applies to national standards). This proposal is examined, possibly modified, and enacted only by unanimous agreement. The most active countries on the ISO/TC 114 committee are Switzerland, France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom and China. Says Patrick Loetscher, “China is increasingly concerned with implementing standards, and frequently sends delegates to Switzerland to learn how we develop our standards.”

Standards provide a basic framework within which we evolve.
Stephen Forsey
Cross-country negotiations

Several systems coexist as each country can develop its own battery of standards which take precedence over international rules. For this reason, countries need to maintain regular contact and, through this type of exchange, provide valuable input that can help shape the content of a new national standard. “A case in point was when China proposed to increase the minimum hardness of materials to 1,500 Vickers, given that they have a strong command of this type of technology. After discussion, we agreed on 1,200 Vickers,” comments Patrick Loetscher.

A change in standards can effectively close a market which can have major commercial implications for other countries, as Patrick Loetscher recalls: “Germany introduced a rule whereby the maximum pressure a watch can withstand had to be indicated in bars rather than metres. Swiss watches were stuck at Customs because they didn’t comply with this particular point.” This indication is now commonly inscribed on cases in both units.

A standard is a useful reference for brands and consumers alike. COSC certification (Contrôle Officiel Suisse des Chronomètres) was introduced in 1973 on the basis of ISO 3159 standard which defines minimum requirements for a wrist chronometer. “Standards provide a basic framework within which we evolve,” explains Stephen Forsey, co-founder of Greubel Forsey. “They establish a standard of reliability which is all the more essential for small companies manufacturing more or less by hand, when each watch is by essence different from the others. We used COSC criteria as a starting-point to draw up our own list of requirements.”

As well as a guarantee of quality, standards reflect a level of expertise.
Benchmarks and beyond

Standards are also a way for customers to situate brands one in relation to another, as not every manufacturer adheres to them. “They provide a means of comparison,” says Luc de Siebenthal, who is movement R&D coordinator at Vacheron Constantin. “At Vacheron Constantin, we consider them a minimum requirement which we must then exceed. Of course, when a standard becomes the norm, so to speak, we tend to forget the difficulties and efforts involved in achieving that standard.”

Something of a hallmark for brands such as Rolex and Breitling, COSC certification has been criticised in certain quarters for being too commonplace, even too old. A view many watchmakers and movement-makers don’t share. They uphold that the permissible deviation in rate of -4/+6 seconds a day remains a challenge, particularly in the context of industrial production. On the other hand, the consensus is that advances in technology and means of production have put these criteria within easier reach. Either way, brands have cashed in on the positive image of COSC certification: these four letters can represent up to 27% of the retail price, for a test that costs CHF 5 per unit (plus VAT and ancillary costs).

Thus standards are as relevant today as always, and brands remain free to comply or not. However, should a brand choose to conform to a standard, it must then keep to it. As well as a guarantee of quality, standards reflect a level of expertise. Swiss watchmaking is keen to maintain its leadership in the field. For this reason, the Association Suisse pour la Recherche Horlogère has launched “Porter 2015”, a project involving several major brands whose purpose is to revise current test criteria.

Back to Top