What changed in ISO 9001:2026 for a certified Philippine company

Written from the ISO 9001:2026 standard (sixth edition, published 16 September 2026). Reviewed by Kaushal Sutaria, Lead Auditor, Sterling International Consulting.

ISO 9001:2026 was published on 16 September 2026 and replaces ISO 9001:2015. For a certified company, the changes land in six places: top management must promote quality culture and ethical behaviour (5.1.1 i); risks and opportunities are determined, analysed and evaluated separately (6.1.2 and 6.1.3); planning of changes carries seven considerations (6.3); every person must be aware of the quality culture and ethical behaviour (7.3 e); management review gains a new input (9.3.2 c); and Clause 10 is reorganised so that continual improvement sits in 10.1. Clause 8 is substantively unchanged and no new document is mandatory. ISO 9001:2015 certificates stop being valid on 30 September 2029.

Where each change lands in a Philippine company

A transition audit is a walk through your site, not a reading of the standard. The auditor sits with each department in turn and tests the changed requirements where they land, so this page is organised the same way, with the clause-by-clause register linked under Read next.

Department	Changed requirements tested
Top management	4.1 climate determination; 4.2 c); 5.1.1 i) and k); 5.2.1 e); 5.2.2 d); 5.3 e); 9.3.2 c), g) and h)
Quality department	6.1.1 to 6.1.3; 6.3 a) to g); 9.1.3 e) and f); 10.1 and 10.2; documented-information wording (Annex A.2 e))
HR	7.1.6; 7.3 e); NOTEs to 7.1.3 and 7.1.4
Operations	Clause 8 unchanged; 6.1.2 NOTE 1 on disruption; NOTEs to 8.3.1 and 8.3.3
Sales and customer service	8.2.1 e) and NOTE; 4.2 c); 10.2.1 NOTE; 9.3.2 c)
Purchasing	8.4 unchanged; 6.1.2; 7.1.6; 5.1.1 i) and 7.3 e)

Top management: what the auditor asks the general manager

Top management carries the largest share of the new wording. The auditor asks the president or general manager to show, with examples from the past year, how they have promoted quality culture and ethical behaviour, how the policy reflects context and strategic direction, and how management review took in changes in what customers and regulators expect.

Clause 5.1.1 now runs a) to l). Item i) requires top management to promote quality culture and ethical behaviour; NOTE 2 says this shows in shared values, attitudes, practices and actions, which is why it needs elapsed time. Evidence is what happened when a shipment failed final inspection, and whether a supervisor who stops a line is backed or blamed. Item k) adds opportunity-based thinking to risk-based thinking. Under 4.1, top management determines whether climate change is relevant, a reasoned yes or no with no carbon accounting; under 4.2 c) it decides which interested-party requirements the QMS addresses.

The policy must take context into account and support strategic direction (5.2.1 e), separated from the 2015 wording in 5.2.1 a)) and be implemented, understood and applied (5.2.2 d)), which is tested on the floor. Clause 5.3 runs a) to f); e) makes reporting on opportunities for improvement a separately assigned responsibility. Management review gains inputs: changes in the needs and expectations of interested parties (9.3.2 c), plus a separate look at how effective the actions on risks (9.3.2 g) and on opportunities (9.3.2 h) have been.

Quality department: the register, the plan and the paperwork

The quality manager owns four pieces of work: separating risks from opportunities in the register and adding analysis and evaluation (6.1.1 to 6.1.3); planning the transition itself as a change under 6.3 a) to g); renumbering Clause 10; and correcting the documented-information wording. None of it creates a new mandatory document, and 9.2 internal audit is unchanged in substance.

Under 6.1.2, risks are determined, analysed and evaluated, with actions proportionate to the potential impact on the intended results of the QMS; NOTE 1 names disruption. Under 6.1.3, opportunities are determined, analysed and evaluated, with actions appropriate to context. A single “risks and opportunities” column with a tick in each row will not pass; the two streams are evaluated separately in 9.1.3 e) and f). Planning of changes gains 6.3 e), f) and g): communication, how effectiveness is monitored and evaluated, and how results are reviewed; 6.3 c) adds information to resources.

Clause 10 has two sub-clauses: 10.1 Continual improvement, which absorbs the former 10.3 and explicitly covers processes and future needs and expectations, and 10.2 Nonconformity and corrective action, where a NOTE in 10.2.1 names complaints as a source of nonconformities. There is no 10.3, so every document that cites it must be corrected. The verbs “maintain” and “retain” are replaced by “shall be available as documented information”, explained in Annex A.2 e); no quality manual, documented procedures or management representative is required. In Effivity the split is a configuration change.

HR: awareness, competence and knowledge that survives resignations

HR is tested through the people on the floor. Clause 7.3 e) adds awareness of the organisational quality culture and ethical behaviour to what everyone working under the company’s control must be aware of, and 7.1.6 now says organisational knowledge is retained, applied and shared. The auditor asks an operator, a team leader and a new hire the same questions.

The realities the auditor knows are high attrition in BPO and export manufacturing, agency-supplied workers and the resignation of the one technician who could set up the machine. If the onboarding deck still covers only the policy and objectives, 7.3 e) is open. Ethical behaviour is tested with situations: “A supervisor asks you to sign an inspection record for a check you did not perform. What do you do?” For 7.1.6, the question is who now holds what the departed technician knew. New NOTEs to 7.1.3 (remote and hybrid work) and 7.1.4 (culture) add no requirement.

Operations: Clause 8 is unchanged, so what is tested differently?

Clause 8 is substantively identical to the 2015 edition, so production planning, traceability, calibration, control of nonconforming output and release stay as they are. What changes sits upstream and downstream of Clause 8: disruption is named in the risk register (6.1.2 NOTE 1), contingency information to customers covers disruptions to provision (8.2.1 e)) and operators must be able to talk about quality culture and ethical behaviour (7.3 e)).

Typhoon closures, flooding, power interruptions and port congestion are the disruptions a Philippine auditor expects to find analysed and evaluated, with actions sized to the potential impact: a generator contract and safety stock for a forty-person plant, not a forty-page continuity manual. The auditor follows the most recent disruption through to whether effectiveness was evaluated under 9.1.3 e). The floor-level ethics question is whether a failed check stops the batch when the truck is waiting.

Sales and customer service: contingency information, complaints and changed expectations

Sales and customer service pick up three changes. Customer communication must include contingency actions covering disruptions to provision (8.2.1 e)); a NOTE to 10.2.1 names complaints as a source of nonconformities; and changes in the needs and expectations of interested parties, customers first, must reach management review (9.3.2 c). A NOTE to 8.2.1 recognises the website, social media and FAQs as customer communication.

The question is concrete: “When the last typhoon or outage hit, how did the customer find out, and what were they told?” Emails, Viber threads and portal notices are evidence; a clause in the contract is not. The auditor takes three complaints from the log and asks whether each became a nonconformity where it should have, and who decided.

Purchasing: unchanged controls, new questions

Control of externally provided processes, products and services in 8.4 is unchanged. Purchasing still meets the new wording in three places: single-supplier and import exposure analysed and evaluated in the risk register (6.1.2); supplier knowledge retained, applied and shared when a buyer leaves (7.1.6); and ethical behaviour in supplier dealings under 5.1.1 i) and 7.3 e).

The register question is which suppliers are single points of failure, such as a sole-source imported material with a six-week lead time, and what the proportionate action is. The ethics question is whether there is a rule on supplier gifts and commissions and whether it has been applied. The knowledge question is what supplier knowledge lives only in one buyer’s inbox.

The transition timetable that applies to your certificate

Global ACI, successor since 1 January 2026 to the roles of IAF and ILAC, published Global ACI-TECH-3-TR 2029-09-30 (M), Transition Requirements for ISO 9001:2026 (version 1.0, dated 4 September 2026), on 16 September 2026. The transition runs three years and ends on 30 September 2029.

Four dates lead up to that close: by 31 March 2027 accreditation bodies are to be ready to assess certification bodies for the 2026 edition; by 30 June 2027 each certification body is to have lodged its transition declaration; by 30 September 2027 the accreditation bodies’ transition decisions are to be complete; and from 31 March 2028 new certifications can be issued only to ISO 9001:2026. On 30 September 2029 every transition must be complete, and ISO 9001:2015 certificates and accreditations cease to be valid.

The transition audit may be attached to a scheduled surveillance or recertification audit, or held as a special transition audit; either way it may be run on site or remotely by ICT. Three things are on its agenda: the requirements that changed, any change in your own context, and whether anything else in the system now needs to change. Additional audit time is also on the table: the certification body must consider whether it is needed, with a justified calculation under ISO/IEC 17021-1. Accredited 2026 certificates can be issued only by bodies whose accreditation has been extended to the 2026 edition, which happens body by body during 2027; ask yours when it expects its extension.

Start with the free gap check, then the written gap report

Every change on this page is a question in our free online ISO 9001:2026 gap check: 20 questions, about ten minutes, a scored readiness report on screen and by email, then a local Filipino lead auditor walks you through the result. Sterling Revise™ turns the score into a written gap report against the ISO 9001:2026 standard, with the number of changes known before you commit, followed by a fixed-price proposal to close them. Take the free ISO 9001:2026 gap check.

Frequently asked questions

Is my ISO 9001:2015 certificate still valid? Yes, until it is replaced by an ISO 9001:2026 certificate or until 30 September 2029, whichever comes first. Global ACI’s transition requirements close the transition on that date, after which ISO 9001:2015 certificates and accreditations are no longer valid, whatever expiry date is printed on the certificate.

Which change takes the longest to evidence? Quality culture and ethical behaviour under 5.1.1 i) and 7.3 e). NOTE 2 to 5.1.1 says it shows in shared values, attitudes, practices and actions, so the auditor looks for decisions and incidents over time and interviews staff at several levels. It cannot be produced in the month before the audit.

Can the transition audit be done remotely? Yes. Global ACI-TECH-3-TR 2029-09-30 (M) allows it to be conducted remotely by ICT, whether it rides on a scheduled surveillance or recertification audit or is held as a special transition audit. The certification body decides the method and must consider whether additional audit time is needed, with a justified calculation under ISO/IEC 17021-1.

Does ISO 9001:2026 require new documents, a quality manual, carbon accounting or AI controls? None of the four. There are no new mandatory documents or records; the wording becomes “shall be available as documented information” (Annex A.2 e)). No quality manual, documented procedures or management representative is required. Clause 4.1 asks only whether climate change is relevant, and AI is not mentioned; ISO/IEC 42001 is the AI management system standard.

Does the auditor interview line staff about ethical behaviour? Yes. Clause 7.3 e) requires people working under the company’s control to be aware of the organisational quality culture and ethical behaviour, so the auditor puts situational questions to operators and team leaders and compares their answers with what top management claims under 5.1.1 i). A contradiction between levels is the usual finding.

Can a new site or subsidiary still be certified to ISO 9001:2015? Only until 31 March 2028. From that date, new certifications may be issued only to ISO 9001:2026, and any 2015 certificate stops being valid on 30 September 2029. A group adding a Philippine site should certify it to the 2026 edition from the start.

Read next

The twelve-step ISO 9001:2026 migration plan puts these changes in order with owners, evidence and dates; the transition audit covers what your certification body will do; the clause-by-clause ISO 9001:2015 vs 2026 register lists every changed line; quality culture and ethical behaviour evidence goes deeper on 5.1.1 i) and 7.3 e); and the Sterling Revise™ transition service produces the gap report.

Sources

• ISO 9001:2026, Quality management systems — Requirements, sixth edition, published 16 September 2026 (36 pages; ISO/TC 176/SC 2 with CEN): clauses 4.1, 4.2, 5.1.1, 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.3, 6.1.1 to 6.1.3, 6.3, 7.1.3, 7.1.4, 7.1.6, 7.3, 8.2.1, 8.3.1, 8.3.3, 8.4, 9.1.3, 9.2, 9.3.2, 10.1, 10.2 and Annex A.2 e), with list letters and NOTEs as cited. https://www.iso.org/standard/9001
• Global ACI-TECH-3-TR 2029-09-30 (M), Transition Requirements for ISO 9001:2026, version 1.0, issued 4 September 2026, published 16 September 2026 (global-aci.org).
• ISO/IEC 17021-1 (audit-time calculation); ISO 9000 (undated normative reference); ISO/IEC 42001 (AI management systems).
• No Philippine regulation is cited on this page.