I belive that 2000 version requires 6 procedures. My companie like most has many more than that and many of them do not reflect anything close to what is actually done, because we are growing so fast things are changing all the time. My question is it possible to replace department procedures with flowcharts.

I know you are thinking " what does he think that is going to do for him, the flowchart still has to reflect the process. Yes, but I find that people can generate a fairly detailed flowchart much faster than a written procedure. I guess it is mental hang up with writting.

I would like to have.
1) Quality Manual- the basic repeat of the standard
2) Flowcharts for procedures
3) Forms to document system.

Will this work?

Heatcraft

Not only can you use flowcharts, where possible I recommend that you do, for the reasons you mentioned.

Also, in another thread, there is discussion about the problem of communicating with people who speak different languages. Visual tools can be a great help there, too. Of course they still have to read the flowchart, but it is much easier to grasp than a pure-text instruction.

Can your proposed scenario work?

IMO, Absolutely.

Good Luck!!

Craig

Heatcraft:

By the way

WELCOME TO THE COVE!!!!

Craig

Flow charts are an amazing tool, Heatcraft! Not only do they, as Craig said, help in cases where there are potential communication issues, but they are wonderful training tools, as well. What a better way to grasp the over process than a flow chart. It is much easier to see the potential paths that a process can lead a person down. Goodness knows, I learn better by pictures than by reading a short novel that some documents can turn into! ;)

Also think about using digital pictures with arrows and text inserted to highlight key points. A picture really is worth a thousand words!

And, btw, welcome! :bigwave:

- RcB

HEATCRAFT----WELCOME !!!...AND, AFTER DOING THIS QUALITY GIG FOR, WELL, TOO LONG, THE ONLY VALUABLE FORMAT I HAVE FOUND FOR ANY INSTRUCTIONS, PROCEDURES, ETC. IS A COMBINATION OF FLOW CHARTS AND PICTURES. KEEP 'EM SHORT AND VISUAL AND THEY WILL BE EFFECTIVE. TAKE THE MULTI-LEVEL BULLETS AND 10 PAGE LEGAL DOCUMENTS AND SHRED THEM ALL !!!!!!!! GOOD LUCK AND LET ME KNOW IF YOU NEED SOME EXAMPLES-----:thedeal:

Heat

I guess you are asking if a diagram of a process, or inter-related sub-processes can replace traditional text based documents.

Well yes.

ISO9001 does not dictate the format of your procedures (or related sub-processes if you wish).

It is my intent to only process map for what we traditionally have seen in procedures, and support elements that need it with works instructions - just like you.

Also as you suggest, a diagram that just points out the major cornerstones of the process is more 'robust' to constant organisational, and detailed changes.

Heatcraft said:

I would like to have.
1) Quality Manual- the basic repeat of the standard


Why? If your going to do this just go out and buy something that has already been done and regurgitate it.

BTW...Welcome
:bigwave:

ISO defines a document as "information and its supporting medium." If your flowchart contains all of the required information, then there's no reason that anyone should question a flow chart as a procedure.

I don't usually use the flowchart as a standalone procedure (although I have done it before). I almost always start by flowcharting a process before I start writing any procedure though. I include the flowchart as a key part of the procedure.

I do agree that flowcharts are great and can replace procedures under the proper circumstances.

What has to be taken into account is how the policy, procedures, work instruction, and related documents are woven into the system.

I've seen too many companies try to initiate flow charts and fail to cross-referrence other important documents that apply to the same activity.

I agree to flow charts all the way, as long as there is a good plan for incorporation into the entire quality/manufacturing system.

Al...:)

Thanks for the responces. I am working for a HVAC company. I have only been with them about 7 weeks and was brought in for several reasons, one being the 2000 deadline is December and they are not yet converted. I have been in quality for about 10 years but my skills definetly are in working with people, processes, and suppliers when things are bad to make the good again. Every company I have worked for before this one had an ISO cordinator. ( who I have to admit I normaly viewed as an obstical to overcome when attempting change). I paying for that now though. I had no idea what they went though. No I know why they did not like me changing things every day! I never knew so many people would rather make a copy of the same old form (which they have hidden in their desk) than go to the supplie closet and get a new pad??? I have so many questions and not alot of time. Thanks again for the help.

Heatcraft said:
---X---

I would like to have.
1) Quality Manual- the basic repeat of the standard
2) Flowcharts for procedures
3) Forms to document system.

Will this work?

1) I agree with Randy: Why? There is certainly no requirement to do that.

2) Well. I like flow charts too, make no mistake about it, but dont be afraid to add a bit of text too. You may still need it once in a while...

3) Forms... Sure, and you don't necessarily need to stick to paper...A lot of the data may already be available in mps systems, databases and such...

Welcome to the Cove :bigwave:

/Claes

I’m with Claes. I don’t buy the idea of flowcharts and pictures being the ONLY valuable format for procedures, instructions, etc. That’s too broad of a statement for my taste. IMO it depends on the situation. Don’t get me wrong, I think flowcharts are great tools, as are pictures, diagrams, etc. and they can be the best tool for the job in many cases, and they (flowcharts) can stand-alone. But sometimes, in my experience, regular old text does the job best. I think we need to keep all of these tools in our toolbox and not assume any one tool is always best. As the old saying goes, to the man who only has a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. Just my penny’s worth.

True Mike, the flowchart format cerainly does not suit a technical instruction for one example.

But I think a process diagram is far better at describing what our processes are, and how they interact, rather than reams of text. I think they serve as a good replacement of the tradional level 2 procedures that we have all come to know.

My advice is always not to stick to any one particular method. I find that in many cases, one department or process will be better served by a graphic procedure or work instruction, and another might be better suited with narrative. Use which ever method makes sense where ever it makes sense.

BTW, I had a run in with an auditor who issued a major because she said that procedures have to be narrative. Flowcharting was not allowed. She would not back down, and my client would not let me intervene with the registrar. They felt it would only make future audits harder. They essentially re-wrote their entire level 2 documentation. (the also claimed I gave them "bad advice" in making procedures that were noncompliant.) Oh well

db

That sucks !

You must stand up to this as it is utter crap.

Dave:

I would be very tempted to have a discussion about this auditor with the "powers that be". Who does she think she is, anyway?

If the customer is worried about having a hard time in future audits, with this type of auditor they ought to be.

Craig

AMEN!!! Auditors like that should be fish bait! :vfunny:

Always remember that you are the customer and you pay the bills!!!

Flex your might when need be and never let an auditor look down on you.

After a few complaints, the registrar will actually find out that they have a couple of bad auditors.

Al...

noboxwine said:

GOOD LUCK AND LET ME KNOW IF YOU NEED SOME EXAMPLES-----:thedeal:

I, for one, would appreciate some examples. I'd like to use flowcharts more in our process, but haven't had much luck finding examples I could adapt...

Thanks!

Always remember that you are the customer and you pay the bills!!!

I would be very tempted to have a discussion about this auditor with the "powers that be". Who does she think she is, anyway?

In this case, I was the consultant. Now the company has to make a decision. Who is right...the person who helped them put the QMS together, or the one who is grading them? They chose the latter. I do think it is a shame that now they are stuck with any little whim of the auditor. :( :mad:

AMEN!!! Auditors like that should be fish bait!
Sorry Mike, wrong thread...........go to the Huntin and Fishin thread. :biglaugh:

Karen,

Use the search function and there are many examples.

Al...

I have attached a copy of one of our new work instructions. They are simple to use and they meet all of the criteria. We also use Flow Charts but usually to act as guides or reminders (prompts) to more experienced people. We Would not - Could not use flow charts across the company because of the different skill and knowledge levels within the work force (Flow charts usually only contain prompts and not detailed text). All operators and tradesman use the various WI's and therefore they must meet the requirements of the lowest common denominator in respect of knowledge. Our workforce and environment does not allow us the luxury of having everyone fully trained in all aspects of the operation before the start so the WI becomes part of the learning package along within on the job training.
If This is not our sole style but it is the model adopted by most areas in the operation. I conducted customer surveys across the company and we ended updesigning this style as the most comfortable for everyone to use and understand. It was a valuable exercise. The old WI's reflected the exact numbering system of the 9K1K standard so

Mike S. said:

I’m with Claes. I don’t buy the idea of flowcharts and pictures being the ONLY valuable format for procedures, instructions, etc. That’s too broad of a statement for my taste. IMO it depends on the situation. Don’t get me wrong, I think flowcharts are great tools, as are pictures, diagrams, etc. and they can be the best tool for the job in many cases, and they (flowcharts) can stand-alone. But sometimes, in my experience, regular old text does the job best. I think we need to keep all of these tools in our toolbox and not assume any one tool is always best. As the old saying goes, to the man who only has a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. Just my penny’s worth.

I agree 100%. You look at your situation and determine what you need. From that one determines the best format to achieve the goal. It may be text. It may be a movie. It may be a flow chart. It may be a word document with pictures (you get my drift, I hope).

As always, my motto:

"One size does NOT fit all!"

db said:
BTW, I had a run in with an auditor who issued a major because she said that procedures have to be narrative. Flowcharting was not allowed. She would not back down, and my client would not let me intervene with the registrar. They felt it would only make future audits harder. They essentially re-wrote their entire level 2 documentation. (the also claimed I gave them "bad advice" in making procedures that were noncompliant.) Oh well
You've got to wonder where some auditors come up with these things. :mad: If that had happened in a company I worked for, that auditor would never set foot in the building again. It sounds like your client must have really been intimidated by them. BTW, you can file a complaint with the RAB... :frust:

While making the transition t 9k2k, we found it helpful to convert many narrative procedures to flowcharts due to lack of usefulness to the shop floor worker, it also saved some trees in the process. We now actually have sign off's on some of the flowcharts and they serve a dual role, first as the procedure, then as record of conformity to requirements. Not sure you can flowchart the six required procedures effectively though, especially internal audits and corrective action. It's been effective so far, and makes reviews and updates a breeze. Micrographics flowcharter is what we use, seems to be pretty decent software for simple flowcharting.

Fred

I have effectively process mapped internal audits and corrective action - unfortunately I can no longer post attachments to this site.

Where can I get information on flowcharts?

M Greenaway said:

unfortunately I can no longer post attachments to this site.

Mind if I ask why you can't post attachments? :confused:

Rhinehart said:

Where can I get information on flowcharts?

Hi Bob and welcome to the Cove!!!!


Use the search function. Flowcharts have been discussed many times on these boards.

:bigwave:

Carol

No problem Mike, its because I am too tight to subscribe to this forum.

Quote "its because I am too tight to subscribe to this forum."

I thought that you could still post attachments, just not be able to download any if you hadn't subscribed?

:vfunny:

Here is another link
http://www.stfrancis.edu/cid/handouts/worddraw/

M Greenaway said:

No problem Mike, its because I am too tight to subscribe to this forum.

Martin,

As I understand it, you can still POST anything you want, anywhere you want. But you can only retrieve attachments from the forums help and coffee break area or whatever it is called. So, I suppose if you want to post something that you want anyone to be able to download, you should post it in the free area. That spot might become popular for "girlie pics" soon the way it sounds! :vfunny:

Also, you can e-mail stuff to people of course. :bigwave:

M Greenaway said:

No problem Mike, its because I am too tight to subscribe to this forum.

Not spending less than 7 cents a day to enjoy all the amenities is more than tight. It's waterproof!:vfunny: :smokin:

I thought about it just as I hit the submit button. I also promised to not discuss it further. But, when I see it mentioned I kind of forget. Blame it on old age. Maybe nobody will notice. I can't delete the post, even if I wanted to.;) :smokin:

Oh yes, so I can.

Sorry will post the attachment

M:

Very nice flowchart!

What does it tell us?

Who?, What? When? Where? Why?

No, it does not tell up much, looks like statements in one of those generic policy manuals that says that yes we do it!!!!!!!! but look somewhere else to on how to do it!!!!!

Am I wrong? If so let's talk!!!!

Al...:bigwave: :bigwave: :)

Al - you are absolutely right.

It is very 'high level' in that it just identifies the 'cornerstones' of the audit process.

Does it say enough ? Well to a skilled auditor who undertakes all audits, probably yes, to a newbee - maybe no.

How would we close the gap for the newbee ? Well training is obviously fundemental, or we could hang work instructions off of each process box if desired, or indeed we could drill down on each process element to lower level sub-processes if the information we need to convey is best suited to this medium.

In the real version we do identify standard form references on this map, and we actually still have a procedure which contains the detail, and is identified as a control on this map for each process box.

Do we need the procedure and the map ? Dunno, but my vision is to pursue deletion of text based procedures and replace them with maps such as this. If we need text or diagrams for a certain process element we will create a works instruction.

What are the advantages ? Well I think it gives people flexibility within the process to express their personal flair, the downside of this is the potential for loss of control - so the maps need to be a fine balance. Also it focusses the individual, and any auditor on the key elements of the process - sorting the wood from the trees if you will, hence the instruction on the process is more immediate and auditors dont get bogged down if, for example, the audit schedule is done in MS Offfice Tasks instead of form ABC123 Issue 3.

M Greenaway said:

Does it say enough ? Well to a skilled auditor who undertakes all audits, probably yes, to a newbee - maybe no.



M.

From my limited viewpoint, being neither a newbee or a skilled auditor, the map looks good to me. The auditor can always ask "how" to those process blocks. From there it either training alone or procedure/training. I have just one little question. You have "Witnessed Process Activity" as an input to the core Audit Process. I think I know why you have it there, instead of along side of "Process Status/Importance", in the upper L/H group on the map. It just looks strange out there by its lonesome. I would think there would be some input off of scheduling to that lonely boy. But, I'm not the skilled auditor here and I defer to those that are. I like it! :agree: :smokin:

E

Absolutely - there is enough to audit against.

For example the map shows audit scheduling, as an auditor I can ask for evidence of this and then make a judgement on its suitability. I wont be blinded because a procedure says the schedule should be on a certain form, or authorised by a certain person, etc, etc - my focus will be the content of the schedule.

Witnessed process activity is what I see during the audit. I deliberated long and hard over what to call this input, I could have purely called it process activity maybe, dunno. Its basically the starting point for this element of the map. What we do in audit is look at people doing things in their process, the outputs, etc, etc.

I am open to suggestions for a better name.

I like flowcharts in some cases; I like written text in some cases. In some cases, like where a procedure is written for more than one audience, function, purpose, or level of personnel, I do BOTH in one document. The text includes details and perhaps background that not every user needs and the flowchart summarizes and condences the information for the people who need the least amount of detail, making the document easier for them to use. I get the best of both worlds.

As far as Martin's comment "I wont be blinded because a procedure says the schedule should be on a certain form, or authorised by a certain person, etc, etc." No one likes to be nailed on trivial technicalities, which is what I think he is saying here. This is why in such cases where I may want to give SOME flexibility without giving totally free reign, and depending on the audience and situation, I sometimes use "weasel words/phrases". You know the deal. Stuff like...

"...unless otherwise approved in writing by XXX."
"...typically..."
"...should..."
"...or similar record/form containing the same information..."
"...unless otherwise documented..."
"...as determined by the XXX Manager."

I also try to give the R&D guys more free reign which they often require so I sometimes write procedures to apply to "standard production" situations and allow the V.P. of R&D to do some things "...at his/her descretion".

Okay, this is a bit odd. I tried to down load Martin's flowchart from QS9000.com, but got the error message, saying I'm not registered. Yet, I'm able to download it from elsmar.com. What gives? Anyone know? :confused:

db said:

Okay, this is a bit odd. I tried to down load Martin's flowchart from QS9000.com, but got the error message, saying I'm not registered. Yet, I'm able to download it from elsmar.com. What gives? Anyone know? :confused:

db,

Were you able to view it? I had no problem opening it. Is that considered a download? I didn't try to acquire it. Hey, I don't know this stuff.:bonk: :smokin:

Were you able to view it?
Nope!

Hey, I don't know this stuff.

Oh man, what an opening....................but rather than jump on that statement with both feet (we can all imagine where this could lead), I'll just say apparently I'm in the same boat. So, let's just rig the bait and fish!:smokin:

M Greenaway said:

I am open to suggestions for a better name.

M,

Because you solicited suggestions, what if you combined the Witnessed Process with the focal Audit Process block and simply called it "The Audit"? This combines all the inputs and also tells them that this is the audit without having to add Witnessed Process? Still looks good, as is. :smokin:

Heatcraft

Flowcharts read so easy...they work like little wonders. You will experience people take a serious interest because most procedures will be on ONE page only and flowcharts read so easy.

You can keep them fairly simple, as long as you have the right people with appropriate skill levels so that they know what they do. You don't have to go to the end degree (that's what you have Work Instructions for) and get everything put down. K.I.S.S.

Here is a sample

Garry

Great map!! What does "SCA" stand for in the box below "Company Mission"?

Originally posted by Garry
Heatcraft

Flowcharts read so easy...they work like little wonders. You will experience people take a serious interest because most procedures will be on ONE page only and flowcharts read so easy.

You can keep them fairly simple, as long as you have the right people with appropriate skill levels so that they know what they do. You don't have to go to the end degree (that's what you have Work Instructions for) and get everything put down. K.I.S.S.


Gary,

Excellent one pager. I like the quote 'as long as you have the right people with appropriate skill levels' I have been preaching this to the masses as we have reviewed all of our work instructions and procedures over the past year getting rid of the uneeded guff. People used to write their WIs as if the wanted the auditor to operate the machinery or do the process. They were forgetting that the instruction was for a highly trained, ticketed operator that had undergone 'Competency Based Training' to achieve the right to operate said machinery or perform said process. KISS is my catchphrase and we have seen some great flowcharts and word/photo combinations replacing the old fashioned volumes of verbosity, diatribe and wordsmithing.

Greg B

Cari

SCA = Sustainable Competitive Advantage

Garry

Originally posted by db
Okay, this is a bit odd. I tried to down load Martin's flowchart from QS9000.com, but got the error message, saying I'm not registered. Yet, I'm able to download it from elsmar.com. What gives? Anyone know? :confused:

It's a cookie thing. If you log in to qs9000.com (the original domain from 1996) the forums will set cookies for that domain. If you change to 16949.com in the url you will get a new set of cookies. QS9000.com and 16949.com still point at the site (technically Elsmar.com). As you might expect from the above, if you then switch to Elsmar.com a third set of cookies will be set.

If you come in through qs9000.com or 16949.com and it tells you you're not logged in just re-login. Privilages and such will not change.

Garry

I wanted to let you know that I have found your Business Planning and Management Review flowchart so useful!! We are having weekly meetings as we work toward transitioning. I used your flowchart as an example of how objectives and KPI's are established and understood at all levels. This really helped everyone "see" what I have been trying to explain. Thanks again for posting it!!

Just wanted to share two examples of how we are using flowcharts in our QMS.

The Field Service Engineer document is an example of one of the procedures we have developed for a specific area/work center. At this point, we are not planning on providing any further detail (personnel are trained, experienced, etc.).

The other document is the process flow diagram I have created to depict how the various processes interact. Please note that this is not totally complete at this time. The numbers referenced are the Procedure/Work Instruction numbers assigned to the various documents defining the processes.

Your feedback would be greatly appreciated. :bigwave:

FWIW, your field service doc loks okay, but one question: Why is verifying that your solution to the problem is effective an optional step?

FWIW, your field service doc loks okay, but one question: Why is verifying that your solution to the problem is effective an optional step?

The FSE works directly with the dealer service tech. Typically, if the proposed solution is not effective the service tech will be back in contact with the FSE (>90% of the time the proposed solution is effective, since most solutions are developed by a multi-functional team which includes design and manufacturing engineering). Typically, the only time that this option is implemented is if the team feels that there may be some question about the adequacy of the proposed solution.

This is a rough draft we are reviewing right now. Any thoughts or suggestions? The Level II reference documents are:

TCP.03.01 - CONTRACT REVIEW PROCEDURE
TCP.06.02 - SUPPLIER EVALUATION PROCEDURE
TCP.05.03 - CONTROL OF CUSTOMER SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
TCP.06.01 - PURCHASING PROCEDURE
TCL.05.03 - CUSTOMER SPECIFIC INSPECTION INSTRUCTIONS
TCL.05.02 - CUSTOMER SPECIFIC SHIPPING INSTRUCTIONS
TCP.15.01 - HAND., STOR., PACK., PRES., & DELIVERY
TCP.07.01 - CONTROL OF CUSTOMER SUPPLIED PRODUCT
TCP.13.01 - CONTROL OF NONCONFORMING PRODUCT

I could not fit the document names and keep this to one sheet this size, but our manual will include our master document list for any reader to reference.

Now we are going to choose the activities that are most critical for our business and areas where we know we have issues and determine how performance will be monitored and measured, and their management review frequency.

I am in the process of creating another map (utilizing Garry's "Business Planning and Management Review" as an example) that will include Management Responsibility, Resource Management, and Measurement, Analysis and Improvement.

Any feedback is appreciated - I'd like to make sure I have a good grasp of showing process interaction and identifying inputs and outputs.
Thanks!

I belive that 2000 version requires 6 procedures. My companie like most has many more than that and many of them do not reflect anything close to what is actually done, because we are growing so fast things are changing all the time. My question is it possible to replace department procedures with flowcharts.

I know you are thinking " what does he think that is going to do for him, the flowchart still has to reflect the process. Yes, but I find that people can generate a fairly detailed flowchart much faster than a written procedure. I guess it is mental hang up with writting.

I would like to have.
1) Quality Manual- the basic repeat of the standard
2) Flowcharts for procedures
3) Forms to document system.

Will this work?

When we converted to the new 2000 standards, I went the route with process maps as well. We actually have our quality system on the organizations intranet. It is used as a business tool. Employees are able to navigate through what I call the Top Level of the process map to individual departments to obtain additional process maps in relations to their job functions. We also included the customer interations in the map so employees can view the customer requirments. It has proven to be very user friendly. I basically used Visio to create our QMS. The great thing about it, it's html based which makes it easy to maintain document control.

Hello Cari,
Looks good. Here is mine:
Paula :bigwave:

Hi All,

There is a site that has a new way to look at process documentation and in particluar mapping and objectives. I wish I had read it last year before I redid my Manual and procedures but I am seriuosly looking at revamping everything to the new control maps. The article (four parts) is called ' The complete guide to understanding & implementing ISO 9001's Process Management Requirements. It is in four parts:
Understanding the Process Approach
Defining & Mapping your Company's Processes
Quality Objectives, and
Process Auditing

It is a very fresh approach to the whole task of documenting the system. I am aware that we do not have to provide process maps but this may be a very good way to document your system and help explain it to those that are new.IT IS FREE

www.oxebridge.com

Greg B