One of the key paragraphs of the Verification Manual indicating the purpose of verification states that the overall aim of verifying is to give confidence to all parties that rely on upon the score set out in the verification certificate, that the information on which the certificate is based has been tested for validity and accuracy. 

 

As Keith Levenstein summates, "The whole aim of verification is to give confidence to any company that their supplier's scorecard is accurate."  With the barrage of counterfeit and fronted scorecards and certificates this is far from the reality. 

 

Verification is intended to reduce the risk of misstatement of individual scorecard elements to an acceptably low level, and to provide an assurance of the integrity of the information on which the verification is based.   "An acceptably low level of risk is achieved if a reasonable person with sufficient knowledge of the Codes will be able to arrive at a similar conclusion based on the same set of information.  Unfortunately this is often not the case," states Levenstein. 

 

According to his experience on the ground Levenstein testifies that the various verification agencies continue to differ by up to 20 points on the companies they verify.   "Each agency has a different interpretation of the codes - moreover they change their minds each year, and each verification analyst has his/her own interpretation.  It is becoming a lottery as to what score any measured entity is going to achieve," he adds. 

 

Levenstein is of the opinion that agencies unilaterally ignore directives from the Department of Trade and Industry, from SANAS and even their own policies.  "The most responsible parties must be SANAS and the DTI.  The responsibility lies with SANAS to accredit agencies, which has to entail giving direction as to how to go about the actual verification. The DTI offer interpretations, but due to excessive workload they don't follow up on queries. A third organisation which also holds responsibility is ABVA. ABVA claim to represent most verification agencies and even have a disciplinary process - in theory," states Levenstein. 

 

In the past weeks the minister has complained about fronting in the industry.  Despite his complaints, his own department is slow to react.  One of the key fronting indicators occurs when different agencies award vastly different points.  

 

"In the past weeks we have come across agencies that use the wrong scorecard or charter to verify. Not only is this inconsistent but is contributing to fronting. We have seen verification agencies award EME certificates to companies that have turnovers far exceeding R5 million," reveals Levenstein. 

 

In all cases, it guarantees that other agencies will not come to the same conclusion based on the same data.  

 

"All that this guarantees that no one can have confidence in any certificate.  The whole aim of verification was to achieve consistency. It has not worked out this way," concludes Levenstein.

 

Ends.

 

Issued By:	The Lime Envelope
On Behalf Of:	EconoBEE
For Media Information:	Angelique Meyer
Telephone:	011 704 7770
Email:	angelique@thelime.co.za