Question????

Does notes posted on machines have to be controlled?

Thanks,

Dwpoze

Yes. However, I am speaking from personal experience. I had an auditor write us up for a zip code list that was posted in a dispatch office, as well as cheat sheets with account numbers posted on computer monitors. Better to be safe than sorry.
I try to follow the rule of thumb: If it is important enough to post, control it, if not , get rid of it.

DWPOZE

Welcome to the cove!

As far as the notes go, I would say that it depends.

Assuming we are talking about an ISO 9001:2000 system, the main clause is 4.2.1, and 4.2.3 also applies.

You didn't say what the notes contain, but according to 4.2.1d, if they are needed to ensure "...effective...operation and control", then the documents (notes) should be "...established, documented, implemented and maintained". So, my take on the "maintain" is, yes, if the note is needed for operation and control, it should be maintained - as a controlled document. Clause 4.2.3 tells us just what this control entails.

Hope this helps.

Craig

Dwpoze,

Welcome to the Cove! Good question!

I think it depends on what the "note" says, and to a lesser degree who the auditor is.

If the note says "all guards must be in place before operation" or "turn off the lights before leaving on Friday" or "this week's quality goal is 98% yield" or something like that, I'd say no.

If it is related to, or can effect, the quality of the product I'd say yes, it should be controlled. But I'll also admit to using uncontrolled cheat sheets from time to time. C Emmonns' rule of thumb is not bad, it is probably the safest bet, but sometimes there are gray areas that I get stuck on.

If I read the controlled procedure, and there are a few equipment settings I need to remember but the rest of the procedure I don't need, I'll sometimes write these settings on a Post-It and use it for a few days as I process various lots of material. I transcribed the data from the controlled doc to an uncontrolled doc. If I had written it on a process record for a single lot, no one would probably say diddley, but if I put it on a Post-It to use for a few days and multiple lots, even if I KNOW the process did not change in the interim, an auditor probably would not like that. If I had kept it in my memory (or tried to) no one would know. I could show proof that the numbers were correct if asked, but this might not get me off the hook. Gray area to me. I'm personally not too much of a stickler on these notes if they are very temporary.

Others???

THAT ONLY DEPENDS ON ONE THING: HOW YOU WRITE YOUR CONTROL OF DOCUEMENTS PROCEDURE. YOU MAKE THE CALL. I WOULD FINE IT VERY COSTLY AND COUNTER PRODUCTIVE TO CONTROL NOTES, WOULDNT YOU ? ????????? WRITE THE PROCEDURE TO FIT YOUR NEEDS AND MAKE IT SIMPLE. GOOD LUCK !


DWPOZE said:

Question????

Does notes posted on machines have to be controlled?

Thanks,

Dwpoze
:D

Hi DWPOZE, and welcome to the Cove. :bigwave:

The question you need to ask yourself is: Is this note "just a note", or is it in fact an uncontrolled written procedure?

We have quite a few controlled written procedures (in some cases excerpts of procedures) posted on the machines.

/Claes

Here's a "jump ball" for you.

(in some cases excerpts of procedures)

If you post an excerpt, haven't you in fact modified the original procedure by eliminating a portion of it? Wouldn't that be the same as changing the original by deleting whatever you don't want? It would seem to me that unless you give the excerpt a new number and then control that, you would be creating a nonconformance.

I had an auditor tell me at a seminar that all "post it" notes had to be controlled or they would be a nonconformance. I told him that may be true in an absolute sense but if he ever wrote it up, he would never be back to my company. End of debate.

Auditors would like to see all documents controlled. It makes an easier life. In fact, all documents don't have to be controlled. You can determine which documents require control and develop a system to control them. Only those which relate to the requirements of the International Standard MUST be controlled and even at that, you have latitude in how you control it.

As with much of ISO/QS/TS, ask "does this make any sense?". If not, why would you do this just to make your auditor happy? He works for you, not the other way around. If you don't think it makes sense, ask him to explain it. If you get "that's the way I interpret it", or "we aren't allowed to consult", call me - I will give you a list of a whole lot of registrars who would like to talk to you.
There are many auditors who are now becoming professional and don't have to go on ego trips showing how they know the letter of the law. The good auditor helps your company by recognizing areas of your system that might affect the relationship with your customers, not on how you notify employees of the upcoming company picnic.

Just my own (getting tired) opinion.

Dave

D.Scott said:
Here's a "jump ball" for you.

If you post an excerpt, haven't you in fact modified the original procedure by eliminating a portion of it? Wouldn't that be the same as changing the original by deleting whatever you don't want? It would seem to me that unless you give the excerpt a new number and then control that, you would be creating a nonconformance.
----X----
Dave

Hi Dave,

hehehe... I was rather expecting someone to bite on that one. :p

Actually, no (imo). The operators have access to the complete documents as well, via the intranet. However, they use some parts of the documents (usually tables, lists and such things) more or less continually, and that would make it awkward to access them from intranet.

So we post the excerpts they need on the machines. When they need the additional information in the complete document they just go to the intranet. We have a database to keep track of not only all recipients of written procedures, but also in what form they need them: Paper size, excerpts, media, you name it.

It works for us, and the external auditors never even squealed in protest. Quite the opposite in fact. They like it, because it prevents information overload.

/Claes

Sounds reasonable but who verifies the excerpt is the current revision?

Dave

No problem there...

The issue can be found in the document header (The smallest excerpt is one page - I should have mentioned that), and can be compared with the complete version (always the current issue) on the intranet. Thus, anyone can verify that they are using the correct issue at any time.

Of course any send-out of new issues includes the excerpts too.

/Claes

OK I give up - no NC this time but I am marking my audit notes to check it when I see it. ;)

Dave

Thank's Dave,

Coming from you, that means a lot. :agree:

/Claes

Absolutely Dave

There is a documented system that theoretically works - now lets go down to the shop floor and see if people actually have the latest info.

M Greenaway said:

Absolutely Dave

There is a documented system that theoretically works - now lets go down to the shop floor and see if people actually have the latest info.

Aye, there's the rub...

No system is fool proof, and now we get to the weak link. The fact that I know what to send to whom does not necessarily mean that the recipients post the documents where they are supposed to, and sometimes my informaton proves to be outdated too. When that happens however, I usually find out about it right quick...

We still find outdated documents every now and then, but I must say that the problem is nowhere near as big as it used to be before we started using this system.

So: We try to keep paper based information to an absolute minimum. The intranet is not fool proof either, but compared to a paper based system it feels rock solid (Until the electrical power fails... ).

/Claes

True Claes

Just making the point, which is related to other threads in other topics, about the potential weakness of compliance auditing, or just auditing from a desk - we actually need to see if this system is implemented and works and is effective. ;)

Oh yeah, do we ever... I'll agree with that anytime.

/Claes