Would appreciate if anyone can comment on my process mapping.

Thanks

Mazura

Not bad, use a similar approach myself.

You only cover 'product realisation' - any view to doing other support processes ?

Would appreciate if anyone can comment on my process mapping.

Thanks

Mazura
Thanks for posting, Mazura. I had a problem in understanding what happens in any of the processes - so what are the process steps. It is fine to have a one box process with inputs and outputs but somewhere you have to define what happens and who does it - is that at the next level down? Also with the process model I was a bit confused as to where resource development fits in. In your model it seems to be a core (customer facing) process - in most organizations resource development would be considered a support activity.

hi there..a good process model.my company also use a similar approach but with core+control+support processes...

Mazura Mokhtar, ABI Bateri tak ada juruperunding ke?

Paul

What makes you say that you have to define the process steps ?

I cannot see that this is an ISO9001 or TS16949 requirement.

I thought sequence and interaction of processes was all that is required.

Would appreciate if anyone can comment on my process mapping.
Thanks
Mazura

It appears that the first sheet in your workbook shows the interaction of the processes (Process Model?) and the subsequent sheets are the process map templates for the processes that you have defined. From that perspective, I like your process maps. They are easy to understand and seem to include the necessary elements. You may want to consider including key metrics as part of the map (KPI's).

Regarding the first worksheet, I think it is a challenge to develop a Process Model or interaction of processes that can be easily understood without some verbal explanation. Complexity can make it difficult to "sell" or use. Nevertheless, as long as you can explain it clearly and it makes sense to the users and the auditors then it works for you.:)

The attached photo shows part of our communication wall. We display our process model and use simple thread to show how our 13 principal processes (3 MOP's, 4 SOP's & 6 COP's) blow out into the 40+ sub-processes. Not shown in the photo are the KPI graphs that are now displayed below each map. These graphs are updated regularly by the process owners themselves. The wall actually runs for 50+ feet as each map, it's KPI graphs and the process leader's name are all displayed. It's quite a hub-bub of information.

Our process model itself is attached to some other thread here on Elsmar and I will post an example of one of our process maps here tomorrow (it's late here now and the network is down and I can't access the electronic copies:o )

ctb

Would appreciate if anyone can comment on my process mapping.

Thanks

Mazura
It looks like the only thing that's monitored is on time delivery and that's the only thing going into the Measurement, Anaysis and Improvement.
That's not really the case. Is it?

Mazura,

Sorry for the delay but here are the examples of one of our process maps and also our process model (interaction of processes). Comments/suggestions/concerns from anyone are appreciated.

fyi- because the process maps are only one page and each process leader is the principal author of his/her map, they (process leaders) are much more comfortable during an audit. They understand that as long as they can explain their map in detail and the trends (actions/reactions/continual improvement) of the graphs that correspond to their metrics, then they will do well in the audit.

ctb

p.s. I translated the process map but didn't have time to translate the process model. Nevertheless, I think you'll get the jest of it.

Mazura,

Sorry for the delay but here are the examples of one of our process maps and also our process model (interaction of processes). Comments/suggestions/concerns from anyone are appreciated.

fyi- because the process maps are only one page and each process leader is the principal author of his/her map, they (process leaders) are much more comfortable during an audit. They understand that as long as they can explain their map in detail and the trends (actions/reactions/continual improvement) of the graphs that correspond to their metrics, then they will do well in the audit.

ctb

p.s. I translated the process map but didn't have time to translate the process model. Nevertheless, I think you'll get the jest of it.


I liked the process map, because it did a nice job covering all the needed steps and requirements. You might want to review clause 4.1.c, though, it is a bit thin. Only the Objectives would help address that item.

However, the process model is basically just a flowchart, so the additional things required in cl 4.1 would need to be added elsewhere.

Nice job, even with my limited Spanish.

Hi,

Thanks for the reply on my process mapping.

Mazura