Ok folks.....I know I am going to take some heat on this one...but I have to ask anyway.

I am just about to get into my transitioning work from 1994 to 2K, and I have reviewed several threads and looked at some examples of Quality Manuals written to the new standard. Everything I look at contains a "Process Map".

I have to ask "WHY?".....not from the stand point that some think process maps are good tools, but from my perspective....why is it there. Does the standard state you shall include one in the manual....or has it become an implied requirement?

I know some will ask...."Are you just going for the certificate?"...to which my response MUST be....YES. I don't need a certificate to provide my customers with what they want. But if our business is to expand and grow (i.e. new customers), we must do this.

Soooooo......Process Maps....required or implied?

Thanks all for your help!!!

Regards,
CarolX

CarolX said:

Everything I look at contains a "Process Map".

I have to ask "WHY?".....not from the stand point that some think process maps are good tools, but from my perspective....why is it there. Does the standard state you shall include one in the manual....or has it become an implied requirement?

Soooooo......Process Maps....required or implied?

No heat here, Carol. IMO, process maps are not required -- no "shall" there. However, you need SOME way to identify your processes and their sequence and interaction (4.1 and 4.2.2). I agree that process maps seem to be the de facto method people are using to do this. However, if you can do it by a 100% text doc., or a combination text doc. and map, you are fine. To me, the Devil is in the details - how detailed does this info. need to be is a big debate. Do all "secondary" or "support" processes need to be shown in these links? Should the measures be included there? Someone mentioned in another thread to imagine doing a process map for the human body!!! Depending on how deep and detailed you decide to make the process map or process description, I can see it being 1 page or 50. I guess the key is what does the registrar require as a minimum, and only go beyond that minimum if you feel you get some value from it.

Very true Mike.

I keep harping on about IDEF0 process mapping, not for pure certification reasons, but as a 'proper' improvement tool which fortunately meets the requirements of ISO9001:2000.

Jim Wade said:

1 the resulting 'map' would be intended only for auditors' eyes (probably as a on-off at certification time?)

2 the top management of her organization will take part in neither the creation of the 'map' nor its subsequent use for internal communication, objective-setting, resource allocation, efficiency improvement planning and so on.

rgds Jim

You got it exactly. We are a small shop and We all wear many hats. The Process map would be strictly for show.

Thanks Guys!!!!!

CarolX

I am finally getting down and dirty into the new version, prepping for my upgrade. The approach I am taking is my new Quality Manual will be VERY general, much more than it is now, and in many ways, just a regurgitation of the standard (LOL...didn't Marc recommend that in another post....sorry...I degress).

I can see the value of adding a process flow diagram. What I want to do is keep it very simple. I have seen some excellent examples posted here and have used them as guides to developing my own.

So...my question is....most of the diagrams I have seen are very detailed and reference procedure numbers. My diagram is going to be simple without those references.

Opinions.....thoughts.....

Thanks!!!!!

CarolX

While a process map is not required for the new ISO9000:2000 it is a beneficial way to determine your Key Customer Processes and to determine the links, supporting processes, management processes, and other internal supports for your operation. Because internal auditing will need to be conducted based on the Key Processes (Customer Oriented Processes) you will need audit the processes and not just elements/clauses of the standard. I have some great examples of what this is all about if you want to contact me.

Thanks

True Wayne !

Carol

I intend to map to sufficient depth that what you might consider as traditional level 2 procedures will be redundant. The 'procedure' will be a lower level map of each process, showing the sub-processes.

CarolX said:

I am finally getting down and dirty into the new version, prepping for my upgrade. The approach I am taking is my new Quality Manual will be VERY general, much more than it is now, and in many ways, just a regurgitation of the standard (LOL...didn't Marc recommend that in another post....sorry...I degress).

I can see the value of adding a process flow diagram. What I want to do is keep it very simple. I have seen some excellent examples posted here and have used them as guides to developing my own.

So...my question is....most of the diagrams I have seen are very detailed and reference procedure numbers. My diagram is going to be simple without those references.

Opinions.....thoughts.....

Thanks!!!!!

CarolX
Carol,

On another recent thread there are several QM's and process diagrams posted by different folks, which you probably saw. One, submitted by someone wanting to remain anon. who went by the handle "JJ" had a part "process diagram" part "text" process description which might be similar to what you're thinking of. I thought it did the job okay, and no one on the Cove protested it. It had procedure numbers referenced, but your auditor might let you get by w/o them. Take a look.

Energy,

Didn't you have some AS9000 QM's and/or process maps from anon. contributors that you were gonna post?

You got it exactly. We are a small shop and We all wear many hats. The Process map would be strictly for show.

Carol, this need not be so. If you mean the map would be strictly for show, I'm with you. However, I just started using process maps to work with a very small, (<12) organization. I am do this so they can "see" their processes. I wasn't convinced all had the same level of understanding of their processes. By mapping them, two things became clear:

1) There was no universal understanding of the process. Each had their own idea of what the process was, and who was responsible for what.

2) In virtually every case there were inputs/resources/impacts to the processes that no one had thought of. The interaction of the processes were not considered, as well as other factors.

This became a real eye opener to the company, and several causes of organizational pain were identified. One person thought it was the best use of my time ever. (For once a customer thought they got their money's worth :bonk: )

I intend to map to sufficient depth that what you might consider as traditional level 2 procedures will be redundant. The 'procedure' will be a lower level map of each process, showing the sub-processes.

Martin - I am seriously considering going this route in the future. As we become more bi-lingual here, a picture can do what words can not. Thanks for your input.

One, submitted by someone wanting to remain anon. who went by the handle "JJ" had a part "process diagram" part "text" process description which might be similar to what you're thinking of.

Mike - yes, I saw that one and it interested me. Gave me some ideas for an abreviated version with out the references to the procedures. I will post it here when I finish it. Thanks!

If you mean the map would be strictly for show, I'm with you.

Dave - yep, strictly to put in our policy manual. Just to give a brief overview of what we do and how it all works. Could be some real value taking it down to the lower level. TY.

:bigwave:

Regards,
CarolX

M Greenaway said:

I intend to map to sufficient depth that what you might consider as traditional level 2 procedures will be redundant. The 'procedure' will be a lower level map of each process, showing the sub-processes.
Martin,

Do you mean this level-2 deep "map" will be a part of the QM?

Carol, any chance of you showing us what your process map looks like? You said it was very simple and I am looking to do the same.

When our CB was doing a GAP Analysis on our 1994 system in 2001 they implicitly told me that they expected to see a flowchart of our business processes in the QM.

Here's what I got. I used the sample posted by anon/jj and modified it to my use.


CarolX

When our CB was doing a GAP Analysis on our 1994 system in 2001 they implicitly told me that they expected to see a flowchart of our business processes in the QM.

Shaun,

If your CB told you that, then it is one of their requirements, not a requirement of the standard.

We are going through a similar thing withour CB. We created a process flow diagram, but most of the required details are contained within the text of the Quality Manual. Our CB has complained that they do not think the Process Flow Diagram meets the requirements of the standard and we are disputing that assessment with them because it is the requirement of the Quality Manual and not the Process Flow Chart that are covered in 4.2.2.

My (humble) advice is that if you plan to not create a process flow and your CB is telling you that you have to, then be prepared to state your case as thoroughly as possible during (or before) the audit.

Good luck,

Colleen

My (humble) advice is that if you plan to not create a process flow and your CB is telling you that you have to, then be prepared to state your case as thoroughly as possible during (or before) the audit.

I think a PF diagram in the QM is probably a good idea, if only to give the auditor a good simple overview of the system (though I know some people hate that point!)

The problem is, as people are asking is what format & how detailed should you go?

After researching PF mapping styles & viewing the examples here (im a PF newbie) I have started some test PF's today & still havent been able to create something that satisfys me.

You know the moment when that lightning bolt of satisfaction hits? No zap yet :(

Just want to reiterate, is process map a requirement to be included in the quality manual? Because, I've seen the quality manual that I downloaded and a process map was included. We have a control plan, can we substitute it, instead of the process map? :bigwave: Inserting text e.g. refer to our control plan.

Best regards,
Raffy

Hi Jim,

YES, my answer is "to understand our business in process terms". I think I have to discuss this to our Top Management, to let them decide what needs to be done.

BTW, the template for a general purpose four line quality manual, help to clear the coonfusion in my mind.

Thanks and best regards,
Raffy

I have been ripping my hair out for a good simple processs map. This is it. Thank you JJ CarolX and whomever else.

My auditor as I have explained in a PM, is anal, I have never met an auditor like him, fortunately for me he likes me and can handle my UPS and DOWNS so to speak. I can see him ripping me apart with a detailed process map.

Thank you again, I love this site.