One customer request, two different decisions
Imagine a Sharjah facilities-maintenance company asked to support a multi-site customer in Dubai. The customer wants faster service reports and evidence that measuring equipment used by subcontractors is suitable. One uncertainty is that an overdue or unsuitable instrument could produce an unreliable inspection result and delay acceptance. That is a risk to the promised service. A separate possibility is that same-day digital reports could make approvals faster and strengthen the offer for future sites. That is an opportunity the company may choose to pursue.
This is an illustrative scenario, not a claim about a LETA project or measured improvement. Both decisions begin with the same customer request, but they require different questions. A risk asks what could prevent the intended result and how the company will control it. An opportunity asks what beneficial result is worth pursuing and how the company will test whether it materialises.
Use a two-column decision sheet—not two generic lists
Risk column: 'A subcontractor may use measuring equipment with an unverified status on the new contract.' The operations owner checks the equipment list before allocation, confirms the acceptance criteria and blocks an instrument whose status cannot be demonstrated. Evidence might be an approved equipment record and a sample of completed service reports. Review whether exceptions still appear on the next jobs.
Opportunity column: 'Same-day digital service reports may reduce customer approval time.' The service manager pilots an approved mobile report for one site, agrees what the customer will accept and compares the time from job completion to approval with a comparable recent job. The manager decides whether to expand, adjust or stop the pilot. Do not promise an improvement figure before the test produces evidence.
The two columns need not be different files. An existing job review, contract plan or management-review action log can hold both decisions if ownership, action and follow-up are clear. The format should fit the organisation's size and work.
A 20-minute meeting exercise
Bring a current change: a new customer specification, a supplier switch, a service expansion or a recurring complaint. Ask the process owner what result the customer expects. Then write one sentence for the principal risk and one for a worthwhile opportunity. If the 'opportunity' is only 'avoid the risk', ask again what positive outcome the team would actively pursue.
For each column record four things: the decision, the owner, the action and the evidence to review by a stated date. The risk action should be proportionate to the possible effect on conformity or customer satisfaction. The opportunity action should be a bounded experiment with an explicit go/no-go point. Leadership should decide which actions merit time and resources rather than approving a register simply because it is complete.
How to use this in a 2026 transition
ISO's public 2026 overview says the new edition gives greater attention to opportunities alongside risks while retaining risk-based thinking, the process approach and continual improvement. These examples are LETA's practical prompts, not copied clause text or a mandatory two-column form. Compare your current approach with an authorised copy of ISO 9001:2026 to confirm the requirements relevant to your scope.
If you hold an ISO 9001:2015 certificate, ask your independent certification body how it will assess the transition within your audit cycle. LETA Advisory can help make the gap review and decision process proportionate; it does not issue certificates or decide the outcome of an external audit.