Hello,

I am curious as to how other companies are structured, and exactly where in the organizational chart the Quality Assurance Manager fits in. High level - low level, Executive Management?

thanks,

A lot depends on company size, IMO.

My company: several divisions, 600+ employees spread over the divisions.
Our quality managers (one for each division) reports directly to the quality director. The quality director reports to the vice-president.

I feel a quality manager should be at the same level as your operations (production) manager.

We are a small (< 100 employees) steel processing company -we don't have a product line - and the the Quality Assurance and Engineering responsibilities are managed by the same individual. It has worked well in our culture - Engineering is more of a sales function, and the Quality responsibilities are continuing to grow.

is there any reason why one cannot wear both hats?

We are a small (< 100 employees) steel processing company -we don't have a product line - and the the Quality Assurance and Engineering responsibilities are managed by the same individual. It has worked well in our culture - Engineering is more of a sales function, and the Quality responsibilities are continuing to grow.

is there any reason why one cannot wear both hats?

If it's working, I don't see why not. If the quality responsibilities continue to grow you may want to rethink the responsiblity loads, as the last thing you want to do is "burn" someone out.

We were recently told in a customer audit that would not accept our engineering manager being our quality manager as well. While not expressly forbibben in general, alot depends on who you are working for. Our customers send thier auditors in once or twice per year, and audit us to thier QMS , even though our own QMS is much less developed, (we are a small company, our customers are 1000+). We have had to separate functions strictly for this reason alone.
To answer the original question, the manager (or director) usually reports to a top level position in the company. ISO says that the designated management representative should report to a top level position, whether that person is the QA manager is another story of course.

Thanks for the responses -

Can anyone give me a good reason why Engineering cannot report to Quality?

We have no design function, our engineering department for the most part is for matching customer product to a process, and costing out additional labor - we are estimating almost. And so much is intertwined between our QA & ENG, I just don't know how to split them - or even if we would have to.

We have ~ 200 employees making a variety of medical device types. We have separate Quality and Regulatory managers, with the Regulatory manager also doing process/materials R&D and sales support. The Regulatory and Quality managers are at the same level as the Production, Engineering and Facilities managers, and all report to the President, who also manages Sales/Customer Service directly.

(Purchasing/Materials Management and Accounting report to the Controller. The President and the Controller report to the CEO/owner.)

A lot depends on your company's size. I think Quality should report to the business decision level in the organization. And should have a voice separate from the function responsible for "making" the commodity that your company sells.
The smaller the company the harder it becomes to separate hats but as much as possible Quality needs to be the eyes and voice of the customer.

Mark

Top, bottom or in the middle....Anywhere you want, it's your organization.

In most cases the Quality Manager is a direct report to one of the following people (based upon your Organization):

1. President

2. Vice President of xxxxx

3. Operations Manager


Now, if the organization wishes to put a solid line on who they report to (not the President of the Organization), I would suggest, that a dotted line be used connected to the President of the Organization.

Thanks for the responses -

Can anyone give me a good reason why Engineering cannot report to Quality?

We have no design function, our engineering department for the most part is for matching customer product to a process, and costing out additional labor - we are estimating almost. And so much is intertwined between our QA & ENG, I just don't know how to split them - or even if we would have to.


There is nothing wrong with having Engineering report to Quality if that is how your organization wishes to set it up.

I have not seen any Engineering Group, except the Quality Engineering group, reporting to Quality. But, this is just my experiences.

Here, I would like to draw attention to a very good document from Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that states couple of points where the QA Manager should have the organizational independence.

This is the most important point that the QA Manager should be independent and not under influence of any function that hinders him / her from improving the organization’s quality system.

Refer EPA Requirements for Quality Management Plans (http://www.epa.gov/QUALITY/qs-docs/r2-final.pdf)

thanks again to everyone!

Looks like an interesting documemt - printing it out now!

thanks,:thanx:

In the organization I work for, the quality manager (my boss) is also one of the owners of the company, so our situation is a bit different that most.

I agree - a lot depends on the organization size. At the smaller end salaried employees often wear multiple hats, however the importance of Quality usually dictates that the head of that Department reports to top management.

I have to agree with Randy. Quality can be anywhere in the company ladder as long as the quality Manager has a strong personality and unwavering honesty.

Personally the 2 places I have worked as Quality Manager or even Management Representative I reported directly to the Plant Manager or owner of the company. While this worked out well for the quality system. there was loads of resentment from other departments (production, scheduling etc...) because we were technically on a higher level in the company.

Al...

In my organisation there no Quality manager. Only Sr. Manager is operating the department, who reports to COO.

Isn't the QM usually the 'management representative' required by ISO? As such, he is supposed to report directly to top management? Doesn't that fix his location in an org chart?

In my opinion Quality should be given a top-management position, how often do you see a VP of Quality? Hardly ever in our industry, its all about Production. I don't think Quality Assurance is given the authority it needs most of the time. I bet most Quality managers report to Production or some other division, instead of Quality being its own top management division.

:2cents:

Isn't the QM usually the 'management representative' required by ISO? As such, he is supposed to report directly to top management? Doesn't that fix his location in an org chart?

You have a misunderstanding. Neither ISO or AS requires that of the Management Representative.

ISO 9001:2000 (and AS9100B)

5.5.2 Management Representative: Top management shall appoint a member of management who, irrespective of other responsibilities, shall have responsibility and authority that includes

a) ensuring that processes needed for the quality management system are established, implemented and maintained,

b) reporting to top management on the performance of the quality management system and any need for improvement,

c) ensuring the promotion of awareness of customer requirements throughout the organization.

AS9100B adds:

d) the organizational freedom to resolve matters pertaining to quality.

Randy is right, it's your company, and the Quality Manager can be fit anywhere in the structure. However, it should be pointed out that the MR does not need to be the Quality Manager. The MR can be placed anywhere you want in the management structure.

Some will claim that the enhancement for AS9100B (d above) means that the MR must report directly to the President, but that is expanding on what the standard says.

For determining that, we get to fall back on the famous element 4.1c and answer the question "is it effective?".

I know the MR doesn't have to be the QM, it just seems in any place I've ever worked, This is usually the case. Maybe it is because these are smaller companies (<200) people, and this is more efficient use of administrative personnel. As QM I usually answer to a GM or production manager. Now as QM and MR, I answer to a CEO.

I know the MR doesn't have to be the QM, it just seems in any place I've ever worked, This is usually the case. Maybe it is because these are smaller companies (<200) people, and this is more efficient use of administrative personnel. As QM I usually answer to a GM or production manager. Now as QM and MR, I answer to a CEO.

That is true, in most organizations the QM is the MR only because that is where most of the Top Management feels it belongs, but the standard does not require it.

In my company (>200 employees) que QM reports directly to the plant manager and he to the CEO. It is a good option in order to organize the production plant and to being informed about the necessities of quality, engineering and production departments.

In our company we have 2QM - QAM(Q.Assurance) and QCM(QControl). Originally QAM was reporting to Technical Director who reports to MD and QCM was reporting to Operational Director who reports also to MD. After few months with this organization our MD decided to change it a bit. QCM to report to QAM who reports directly to MD.

Why?
Some important informations were "lost/hidden" in Operational site and MD never realized it.

My persomal experience:
- Quality has to be independent.
- QM has to be strong personality
- If quality reports to Operational director who is also responsible for production and logistics than it never works...

In our company we have 2QM - QAM(Q.Assurance) and QCM(QControl). Originally QAM was reporting to Technical Director who reports to MD and QCM was reporting to Operational Director who reports also to MD. After few months with this organization our MD decided to change it a bit. QCM to report to QAM who reports directly to MD.

Why?
Some important informations were "lost/hidden" in Operational site and MD never realized it.

My persomal experience:
- Quality has to be independent.
- QM has to be strong personality
- If quality reports to Operational director who is also responsible for production and logistics than it never works...

Michelle,

Thanks for your input on how your organization's structure is. I do have a question(s) though:

1. Why is there 2 QMs? I am just curious with this type of organization.

2. What are the differences in their responsibilities?

As for the independence of the Quality Organization, I don't totally agree with that, only because that is kinda old school in my opinion.

As for the QM having a strong personality, I totally agree with that. Besides they also have to be good sales person.

Having quality reporting to operations not working. I haven't seen any issues with that type of reporting structure in my career. Please provide some experiences with this.

Michelle,

Thanks for your input on how your organization's structure is. I do have a question(s) though:

1. Why is there 2 QMs? I am just curious with this type of organization.

2. What are the differences in their responsibilities?

As for the independence of the Quality Organization, I don't totally agree with that, only because that is kinda old school in my opinion.

As for the QM having a strong personality, I totally agree with that. Besides they also have to be good sales person.

Having quality reporting to operations not working. I haven't seen any issues with that type of reporting structure in my career. Please provide some experiences with this.

Yes our organization is unusual:
Top Management - materials manager, production manager, store manager,QCM
Senior management - Operational Director,Technical Director, Financial Manager, QAM

Top Management reports to Senior Management who reports to Managing Director

MD and Technical Director are comming from UK (do not speak Czech), rest of the team is Czech.

QCM is responsible for daily production quality and suppliers quality - daily issues on the shop floor, scrap analysis - IPPM, daily audits,incoming inspection.. Line auditors/quality technicians are reporting to him
QAM = Customer representative - customer claims, continuous improvement. QAM is a member of project team -responsible for APQP and PPAP. - thats why QAM was originaly reporting to Technical director (who is responsible for new projects)

Originaly they wanted to split production and customer quality - thats why there is 2QMs. Other argument was that QCM is overloaded... ???

After few months MD realized that many quality issues were hidden by Operational Management. The main reason is different culture (UK/Czech). Czech people wants to solve everything internaly which is fine but we cannot learn from our mistakes and cannot work on continuous improvement. And QCM was not strong enough to argue with Operational Management.Operational management is strongly focused on sales to customers but quality is sometimes on the second place.

So QAM was hired to be somewhere between UK and Czech :D Someone who can argue with Operational Management (in Czech language) and who is able to talk to MD and argue if needed.

There is a big cultural difference between CZ and UK but Its hard to explain...

Yes our organization is unusual:
Top Management - materials manager, production manager, store manager,QCM
Senior management - Operational Director,Technical Director, Financial Manager, QAM

Top Management reports to Senior Management who reports to Managing Director

MD and Technical Director are comming from UK (do not speak Czech), rest of the team is Czech.

QCM is responsible for daily production quality and suppliers quality - daily issues on the shop floor, scrap analysis - IPPM, daily audits,incoming inspection.. Line auditors/quality technicians are reporting to him
QAM = Customer representative - customer claims, continuous improvement. QAM is a member of project team -responsible for APQP and PPAP. - thats why QAM was originaly reporting to Technical director (who is responsible for new projects)

Originaly they wanted to split production and customer quality - thats why there is 2QMs. Other argument was that QCM is overloaded... ???

After few months MD realized that many quality issues were hidden by Operational Management. The main reason is different culture (UK/Czech). Czech people wants to solve everything internaly which is fine but we cannot learn from our mistakes and cannot work on continuous improvement. And QCM was not strong enough to argue with Operational Management.Operational management is strongly focused on sales to customers but quality is sometimes on the second place.

So QAM was hired to be somewhere between UK and Czech :D Someone who can argue with Operational Management (in Czech language) and who is able to talk to MD and argue if needed.

There is a big cultural difference between CZ and UK but Its hard to explain...

Thanks Michelle I appreciate the answers. Sounds like an interesting Company and very different than what I am use to.

It is very interesting to me how other countries and organizations have their reporting structure.