So, a brief introduction, I recently took over our TS 16949 system. Long story very short, it just (two minutes ago) came to my attention that our numbering scheme for 3rd level documents is crap. Now I need to create a new one.

My thought is along the lines of:

DOCUMENT TYPE-DEPARTMENT-THREE DIGIT NUMBER

So

QA-ASY-001

Would be the first quality alert for assembly.

The thing is, I now have to determine what all the potential types of documents there could be. So far I've come up with:

Operator Job Instruction (for assembly operations)
Machine Settings Instruction
Quality Alert
Work Instruction (ie, how to write a document, how to look something up in the MRP system, etc...)

Can someone give me a hand here? Maybe suggest a numbering scheme that they use or tell me what I'm overlooking? My boss wants this by tomorrow. :bonk:

Excellent scheme....I like it.

FWIW - I use Dept - Year Created - Sequential number

QP-05-29

Quality Process created in 05, 29th docuemnt in this series.

A billion ways to skin the cat!

Scroll down to the bottom of this page for links to similar threads.

Do whatever you want...

I like alphabetical by title/number of pages/and Julian date myself....or maybe weight times length divided by temperature as the doc number.

You don't need to number them. You can control them by title. I like Randy's method myself, but you must use the Kelvin scale for temperature!

You don't need to number them. You can control them by title. I like Randy's method myself, but you must use the Kelvin scale for temperature!
The point my colleagues are making is that ANY scheme is OK so long as it is consistent and helps the users locate and retrieve documents.

You can use titles if you are using a computer-based system for document storage, since a google-type search will let you search on any aspect of the document. If you are using hard copies in standard file cabinets, chronological numbering with a good cross-index system makes sense so you don't have to shuffle all the documents when you fill up the first file cabinet, you merely add another file cabinet and continue the numbering scheme. The cross-index is imperative in a hard copy system!

:topic: The time table for doing this seems unusually short, but some managers expect the difficult to be done now and the impossible to be done by tomorrow.

... our numbering scheme for 3rd level documents is crap.

What's crappy about the current scheme? I think your new numbering scheme sounds fine.

FWIW - When I started working here, they already had their documents numbered by the ISO9002:1994 element numbers. When we upgraded to ISO9001:2000, I did not change the numbering scheme because, frankly, I didn't care. :D Thread-Craft Procedure for Control of Internal Documents = TCP.05.01; the procedure for Control of Engineering Drawings is TCP.05.02 - the .05 is just arbitrary now.

What's crappy about the current scheme? I think your new numbering scheme sounds fine.

The trouble with the current scheme is that our 3rd level documents are controlled departmentally rather than centrally. We have a pretty good scheme for Operator Job Instructions and Machine Setting Instructions, but for 3rd level documents that support a 2nd level document, we were just referencing the 2nd level document and adding a letter in sequence.

I had a :mg: moment when I went to assign a number to my new 3rd Level Template and thought "Yikes, how do I know that three other departments in the plant don't already have a TS-4.2.3-A ?"

The trouble with the current scheme is that our 3rd level documents are controlled departmentally rather than centrally. We have a pretty good scheme for Operator Job Instructions and Machine Setting Instructions, but for 3rd level documents that support a 2nd level document, we were just referencing the 2nd level document and adding a letter in sequence.

I had a :mg: moment when I went to assign a number to my new 3rd Level Template and thought "Yikes, how do I know that three other departments in the plant don't already have a TS-4.2.3-A ?"
Why not simply ask each department to provide a current list of existing document numbers together with the title and description? If there are no conflicts, the centralization can simply consist of periodic updating of department lists to a central point.

For this specific case, do the departments maintain the master documents as computer files or hard copies? If computer files, the situation is relatively easy to coordinate. If hard copies, the centralization requires creation of an additional cross-index for the central file keeper which aggregates the cross-indexes (indices?) of each department.

For hard copy files, the problem is more complicated when the number of files and frequency of creation, change, or modification is great. In computer systems, the number or frequency is immaterial.

Use the search tool here in the Cove and google generally for "electronic document management" to get a better picture of off-the-shelf systems for electronically coordinating documents.

Overall, I think you are putting too much emphasis on the numbering scheme and not enough on management of the documents.

Your idea sounds like it would work fine. Just do whatever makes the most sense for your plant, it doesn't matter what anyone else does. If it makes sense to you, to your workers, and to management, then it will be used. It is when things don't make some sort of "connection" in the minds of the people using it that a system does not get used.

Our esteemed colleagues are all very correct in their answers. Do what works best for you.

as an aside, we have the following types of docs in our system:
Quality Manual
Quality Procedures
Work Instructions
Forms
Reference Sheets

Originally, management wanted our document control to be handled in the individual departments also. But, they soon learned about the types of problems you describe. Documents with same names, inability to easily share information between departments, too many variances in controls, etc.

Good luck. Make your system work for you, don't work for it.

Do whatever you want...

I like alphabetical by title/number of pages/and Julian date myself....or maybe weight times length divided by temperature as the doc number.

Well done Randy. You could also have colour/originators birthdate/day of the week :lmao:

On a more serious note I agree more with Carol's line of thought.

We use department name plus a sequential number WI DB-01 = Work Instruction, Deadburn, Document #1. Very simple. Documents that effect ALL departments are usually a Quality specific document (such as Auditing) and it's title is WI QA-02. Like I said, very simple and everyone can find their documents in the system. A form is similar just the prefix is different QF DB-01 would be Quality Form, Deadburn, Form number 1. Our old system was based on the standard's numbering system and Non QA types could never find the document they wanted we had great doc numbers like WI 5.08.1A or QF 5.04.2B. I could not find anything on the system I had to refer to the standard to work out what I was looking for.

Whatever you do, keep it simple and user friendly. We came up with our system after CONSULTATION with the users. I asked THEM what THEY wanted as they had to use it. Don't adopt a system that you think the Registrar will like or want....It is not their system.

Well done Randy. You could also have colour/originators birthdate/day of the week :lmao:




Thanks... :thanx:

I just wanted to make a point that personally chaffs my 5th point of contact (that's butt for you folks with an B of Arts degree :lol: )

Too many times folks and organizations get all wrapped around the axle and their t-t in a wringer over Bull Bagels like numbering systems for documents. All anyone has to do is to be able to differentiate 1 document from another. How it's done...who really cares? There are more important things that need to be addressed like developing a "real" and "effective" Internal Audit process that focuses on adding value; developing a sound and effective methodology for generating competence of employees; creating realistic and truly achievable objectives; and establishing "true" committment.

Thanks... :thanx:

I just wanted to make a point that personally chaffs my 5th point of contact (that's butt for you folks with an B of Arts degree :lol: )

Too many times folks and organizations get all wrapped around the axle and their t-t in a wringer over Bull Bagels like numbering systems for documents. All anyone has to do is to be able to differentiate 1 document from another. How it's done...who really cares? There are more important things that need to be addressed like developing a "real" and "effective" Internal Audit process that focuses on adding value; developing a sound and effective methodology for generating competence of employees; creating realistic and truly achievable objectives; and establishing "true" committment.Don't hold back, Randy. Tell us how you REALLY feel!:lmao:

This is from our doc control procedure. Hope it helps!!! I think i'm currently in doc control **** as well...we have a system, we just don't necessarily follow it well! :bonk:


Examples of types of things that need control:

Operating Procedures and Standards
Inspection instructions
Test procedures
Control Plans
Set-up and Work instructions
Business Plan
Environmental Management System Procedures
AIAG Manuals
Customer Standards and Specifications

and this is how we number them - 2 letter dept code, followed by 1 letter type of document code, dash, document number. i.e. an example of a quality dept. form is QAF-6.0, an example of an environmental procedure is EMP-3.0. We keep a document list that shows the doc #, doc name, revision level and where the electronic copy is stored.

EN Engineering
HR Human Resources
MA Materials
QA Quality Assurance
PR Production
QS Quality System
SO Standard Operations
MN Maintenance
EM Environmental Management System
CI Continuous Improvement
AC Accounting
OP Operations


P Procedure
I Instruction
F Form
C Flow Chart
M Matrix
J Job Description

Saw this thread came back up to the top so I thought I’d update. Found that in several cases, we had 5 or 6 different documents using the same control number. The old numbering scheme would have been fine, if departments had had a way to find the next available number in the sequence. As a result, I rewrote our document control program as follows:

-New numbering scheme to prevent repeat numbers
-Required departments to store work instructions all in one folder on the network
-Added a “# of controlled copies” and “Locations/holders of controlled copies” field on the master document list to provide for much easier recall of outdated documents

So far, it seems to be working out well for us.

-New numbering scheme to prevent repeat numbers
-Required departments to store work instructions all in one folder on the network
-Added a “# of controlled copies” and “Locations/holders of controlled copies” field on the master document list to provide for much easier recall of outdated documents

So far, it seems to be working out well for us.
Glad to hear it!! Thanks for the update.

-Required departments to store work instructions all in one folder on the network


I hope that's one folder per department:

Controlled Documents
|
|--- Department 1
|
|--- Department 2
|
|--- Department 3
|
|--- Procedures
|
|--- Work Instructions
|
|--- Pictures of Randy's tatas in a wringer
|
|--- etc.

Folders are a great organizational tool. They're easy to setup, and you can control permissions on a folder or sub-folder basis.

Oops. I indented the sub-folders under Department 3 (Procedures, Work Instructions, etc), and forgot that the spaces wouldn't come through in the posting.

This is very odd, I was just working on the numbering system for document control and boom there this thread was in front of me.
This is what I came up with. I'm working on Nonconforming Material Control, creating an NCR Form. I've given it the document control number of QA-NCR-01. Short and to the point. QA=Quality Assurance NCR=NCR Form 01=the start of the numerical sequence on which I plan on numbering them