I request the experts on QMS to clarify clearly the difference between mission,quality policy, objectives,goals,targets as theses words are sometimes confusing to correctly interpret.
Thanking you somanath

Hi tsomanath
Hope this info helps you out....

Quality Policy - This should be a brief statement the shows a commitment by your top management to the quality management system. It should also describe the commitment to continuous improvement of the effectiveness of your system as well. A mention about establishing and reviewing objectives relevant to your business needs would also be required. You want to state that the success of your system involves the participation of all employees.

Mission Statement - Easy to answer - What is the purpose of your business? What are you trying to achieve? Typically a one line statement may be all that is required. It typically reflects the comments made in the Quality Policy

Objectives - Set by the top management in your company, these need to be 'SMART' goals. ie. Specific, Measureable, Accountable, Realistic and Time. What is it that you are trying to achieve through your processes?

Goals - These will compliment your Objectives. By way of 'Policy Deployment' the "Objectives" reflect the Quality Policy and Mission Statement and "Goals" reflect the "Objectives". So for an example, the CEO sets Objectives, the Business Unit Manager sets goals that reflect the CEO's objectives, the Department Manager sets Goals that meet the Busines Unit Manager's Goals, and the employees' set Goals that meet the Department Manager's Goals. That way, everyone in the organisation is working towards the same Goals and Objectives which then reflects the Quality Policy Statement. Goals should also be "SMART" in their development and relevant to the business needs.

Targets - would most generally come from goals and objectives set. That is, what do I have to do to achieve my goals? So I need to set minor goals or "targets" along the way to ensure I stay on track in reaching my goal and meeting business objectives.

Hope all that makes some sort of sense. There will most likely be others that may have a difference of opinion, but in reality, it would most probably mean the same thing.

I was given a task to develop a Quality Policy & Objective for the version 2000 standards. I have several questions needed help :-
1) What is the differences between the two ?
2) We have a Vision and Mission, is there a difference betwen the Mission and Quality Policy or Objective ?

Thanks

I would suggest that you start by taking a quick read through:
http://Elsmar.com/ubb/Forum15/HTML/000132.html
and http://Elsmar.com/ubb/Forum15/HTML/000257.html
and http://Elsmar.com/ubb/Forum15/HTML/000154.html

I believe these have the answers you seek. If not, come back to this 'topic' with mose specific questions and we'll try to help.

Also see:
http://Elsmar.com/ubb/Forum15/HTML/000132.html
and http://Elsmar.com/ubb/Forum15/HTML/000257.html <HR>Edited 28 October 2001

I can't re-lookup and change every old link to posts in the old forums. Most of them *should* still be there. If you want to find the post in the New forums, if the link to the thread in the old forums works (most of them should...), look at the thread (topic) title and what forum it is in. Then back here in the New forums - go to that forum and look for the thread topic title - OR - do a Search for the key words from Title (Note - you can search entire threads or just the 'subject' or 'title' - if you look in the Forums search page you'll see the options.

Call me lazy... :rolleyes:

If you want to find the post in the New forums, if the link to the thread in the old forums works (most of them should...), look at the thread (topic) title and what forum it is in. Then back here in the New forums - go to that forum and look for the thread topic title - OR - do a Search for the key words from Title (Note - you can search entire threads or just the 'subject' or 'title' - if you look in the Forums search page you'll see the options).

To my mind Mission and Quality Policy are the same thing, i.e. an overall statement of the direction a company wishes to take, including its quality aspirations.

Again Objectives, Targets and Goals are the same thing, i.e. a measurable, quantifiable level of performance that the company wishes to achieve.

I think its that simple !

Dear Cove friends,
I have done some search, but cannot find exactly.
I have question regarding Quality Objectives and Policy Deployment
1. Should quality objective of each function in the organization correlate with company goals, especially in term of calculaiton?

To clarify my question, here is the situation. For example, the company policy is to achieve 100 % delivery on time for all customers in year 2002, If I am R&D department, how can I deploy this policy to my department’s quality objective.

Can I said that R&D quality objective is to reduce average development time of each model not over 2 trial runs per program. Because I think the faster development time, the faster product launch. Then we can achieve 100% delivery. However, this cannot explain by mathematics how can my objectives have correlate with company goal.

2. Can anybody suggest the systematic way to generate each function measurable objective base on company goals or strategic goals? If you have.

Thank you.
QSMSO

Shortening lead time is not necessarily the same as achieving on time delivery.

Personally I dont think that a company wide objective of achieving on time delivery needs to be translated into a departmental objective for every department in the organisation.

If you ae not achieving your company wide objective you would then take corrective action. Like any CA this will involve determining root cause and taking appropriate action. If in determining root cause you see that the hold up is due to R&D evaluation time then you might create a departmental objective on some aspect of R&D activity to ensure it is carried out expediently.

Well thats what I think.

MO:
Vision- a statement of what we are trying to do as a business
Mission- what we have to do as a business to achieve our vision
Quality Policy- ties the vision and mission in a brief statement
Objectives/Goals- same.. measurements that will let us know how we are doing in relation to the above
Targets- the attainment number for objectives/goals (e.g. be at 4 sigma)

Good thoughts in this thread. :thedeal:

We are right now working for the 9K:2: version and we are done with the Quality Policy and Corporate Objectives. We shall now be establishing our Departmental Objectives and Process Goals. Should each of our Departmental Objectives be accompanied with an Action Plan and timetable? :eek: How do Process Goals correlate with the Departmental Objectives? Could you further discuss what process goals are, what it involves and requires?:confused:

Badly need help as we are already way behind our sked.

Thanks so much!

Karis :o



:( :bonk:

I agree with the contributors that use a two level (simple) explanation for the quality policy and objectives. I have two questions however: 1. Do you need a quality objective for each process or is a few that are key to the entire organization acceptable? 2. Where and how are organizations documenting their objectives (e.g. a list in their quality manual that lists the objective, the way it will be measured and what the goal is)?
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
:lick:

#1 No
# 2 that is what we are doing

Ted,
My opinion is that you do not need a quality objective for each process but that if the process makes a contribution to the quality objective for another process, then a smaller target for that contribution is set.

We are not documenting our objectives in the quality policies manual because then we would be revising the manual upon each change of objective. We will document the objectives by distribution to employees and posting in relevent locations, including our QMS network site.

Our objectives are fairly straightforward as far as goals and the way they will be measured since they are performance based, so I don't know that any additional documentation is needed as you describe.

However, for our process criteria for success and methods of measure, there is a title page that introduces each process (on our network) and we have those listed there.

Jim,
I know you get hung up on the word "quality". I don't have that problem. Because I see "quality" as meeting requirements. And those include the requirements of our organization for our own selfish purposes - such as making money and keeping our company running as lean as possible.

Our quality objectives look at those things that we see as both cost-effective for us as well as service-improving for our customers.

To establish a pool of possible objectives from which the top mgt. group could then choose a few from, i interviewed each member of management to find out what they wanted to accomplish with a QMS. I found it amazing that one of the VP's as well as the CEO said that they would like to find a way to gauge the happiness and satisfaction of the employees. That they found employee satisfaction as a key element of our success! In other words, something that we think is a requirement for our organization .....and that is "quality". So we will set a "quality objective" to do some things we feel is crucial to employee satisfaction.

(It's friday, the margarita blender is churning away, we had a potluck bar-b-que for lunchtime, and half the staff is dressed in Hawaiian shirts. Think we're experiencing some satisfaction? Oh yeah! Now to spend some "quality time" with that margarita.....)

Jim,
In my opinion, you have explained a fundamental problem with the ISO series of standards. I think that ISO should revise the standards and remove every instance of the word quality from the text. Don't you think managers would pay more attention if ISO 9001:2000 was a "Management System" standard.
Our manager's feel that it is something separate from their actual business objectives (most of which are sales goals). Do you have any advice on moving employees and managers to a place where the ISO standard is a core of their business rather than a periphery?
:truce:

Remember Quality is whatever a company has to do to deliver a product that the customer wants.. I think this is sort of the defination of Quality based on ISO 94. What I tell when I train that trditional Quality is only 1/20th of the 94 standard. I believe Quality was removed in the title of the 00 standard.

Both ISO 9001:2000 and TS 16949 (based on ISO 9001:2000) still have titles that read "Quality Management Systems". I think most traditional quality people realize that this is a standard for the entire business (since they usually are required to do the implementation) however, it is convincing the other departments that ISO also includes their area.

Observation:

We love to label things, don't we?!

Is making the distinction between Business and Quality Systems helpful, or does this just create a muddled picture?

In some instances, I can see where making the distinction can be useful, especially in the sense of explaining 'traditional' viewpoints. In many other instances, it is not only unhelpful, but unimportant as well. An example is when making a determination about what measures to talk about during Management Review. Should they all be 'traditional' Quality System measures or should other areas such as 'efficiency' be discussed? What ingredients are necessary to create a good meeting? What are you measuring?

Personally, I try to view things from a larger System's view. Traditionally, I like to include the Business, Quality, and Safety systems. All subsystems are present in our work places as well as elsewhere.

To think that there isn't any overlap is a gross oversight. I think that the confusion exists in where things overlap and our need to place a label on that 'gray' thing. In my experience, this happens often. Lots of time lost on trying to put the right label to something. In the end though, how important was the label?

Kevin

This is an interesting discussion.

I think the desire to keep quality objectives separate from business objectives has its roots in early TQM efforts, where the gurus urged us to separate financial aspects from quality meetings because, at the time, financial objectives overwhelmed the meetings and quality didn't get the focus.

I think quality has made significant progress in the last 20 years and we are at the point now, where if we continue to separate business issues from quality issues, quality runs the risk of becoming irrelevant.

I've made an attempt to merge the two, and its worked successfully for several years. Here's the text from my procedure on setting objectives:

This is a pretty good old thread. Just wondering if anyone has anything new to add or any clarifications / observations on the thread to this point.

I think Ted, Kevin, and yes, Rosie (oh how I hate to be nice) are pretty right on. What they are stating is pretty much how I try to portray the relationships of the variety of "systems" out there in the world. To continue with the mindset that "the ?MS" is a stand alone, "special" way of doing things is detriminal to good business management on the whole.

Gasp! Be still my foolish heart! Validation of my worth from Randy!! :lmao:

Since this posting I have changed jobs, and did a second upgrade to the 2000 rev with the new company. While my last employer had done a good job of linking their Mission-Vision-Quality Policy and objectives, my new employer doesn't even have a Mission/Vision Statement. And don't see why they need one.(culture shock)

So I started with what we had, a Quality Policy, and tried to show them how the quality policy is linked to objectives. It was a good exercise and they "got it". If you'd like a copy of the handout I did, send me a PM with your email.

I used to wonder why companies do Mission Statements...it always seemed like a blinding statement of the obvious, but I have changed my opinion over the years. Companies very often stray from their core competancies, and usually fail as a result. The Mission Statement really helps companies stay focused on what they do best.

Kind of late entering into this challenging discussion on word interpretation... but FWIW -

Goals, objectives, targets:
I always said that my goal was to attain my objectives and hit my targets.

Quality:
I like to KISS :o Therefore, to me Quality simply describes something that is as it expected to be, function, etc. There is not poor quality, good quality, better quality, or such. Anything less than or short of as expected, is not quality.

My 2¢

Alex

Speaking of 'variable' Quality - - -

Off Topic? I’m not sure, but I just have to share with you something I heard a few minutes ago. I have heard this type of statement many times before, but never as concisely and to the point as one of our technicians just put it:

When asked whether an instrument that he was testing was good, the technician, without one iota of hesitation, replied:
“Just how badly does the customer want it?” :biglaugh:

Something to remember – and this guy doesn’t even work in sales! :rolleyes:

Alex

Here is a very similar thread

http://Elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?p=61107#post61107

& Here is my response in this thread

http://Elsmar.com/Forums/showpost.php?p=61107&postcount=5

Greg B

Perhaps some graphics could be of use here? I doodled a bit and came up with this picture. Opinions?

:paint:
Claes

Perhaps some graphics could be of use here? I doodled a bit and came up with this picture. Opinions?

:paint:
Claes
Want to try the attachment again?

Whups... The doodles are long gone, I'm afraid.

/Claes