I'm curious to know how others view the value of their organization's Quality Policy and how well it has been communicated and indoctrinated into everyone's life at work. Our organization, for one, really only has a Quality Policy in the Quality Manual to satisfy the ISO requirement.

If you think your organization has a powerful or motivating Quality Policy or that your organization really leverages and rallys around, please provide it and explain how you are able to do this.

This thread should prove interesting, though I have some preconcieved ideas about the outcome of the poll.

I replied It's not valuable at all, but we have made an honest attempt at communicating to the rest of the organization.

The policy is readily available and people know where to find it. We do not require our staff to learn it by the letter but we do want them to "get the message". They get it, but the policy in itself has little to do with that. The real reason is an abundance (apart from written procedures) of information about our QMS, why we have it, why we ask them to do this and that and what they have to gain from it.

Try fitting that into a policy...

/Claes

I voted "Somewhat Valuable" simply because it must set up a philosophy within the company. For most of us a fitting quality policy is nothing more than "We will do what we must to maintain customer sat and stay in business". We can not control the increase in raw materials, we can not control the cost of labor, especially in a union shop, we can not control the cost of delivery, etc. etc., but customers still require a cost decrease over the life of a contract. The only way to make ends meet is to improve internally.
We have had discussions on How do you exceed customer expectations of On-Time Delivery so the ever present exceed customer expectations is not really achievable in all areas. So Claes I agree with you on information about our QMS, why we have it, why we ask them to do this and that and what they have to gain from it.
For companies that "get it" and really desire to "Be the Best" the standards are nothing but a starting point or a kick-off.

Like any tool used within a Management System, it's usefullness is dependent on how it is utilized. A Quality Policy developed for the sake of meeting a 'shall' and/or to look pretty hanging up on a wall is going to be useless.

Our Quality Policy is posted around the plant and appears in our bi-monthly company newsletter. It is part of every new (and transferred) employee's Management System orientation.

But no one has it memorized.

It is a tool to help remind employees of their role and importance within our Management System and in the fulfillment of all requirements (Customer, statutory, regulatory, etc.).

The Quality Policy, in conjunction with our Objectives, Basic Values and Beliefs, Quality Slogan, Key Indicators, and Strong Goals form the base from which an employee undestands his/her part within the organization.

Like any tool used within a Management System, it's usefullness is dependent on how it is utilized.

I agree completely. It is what you make it, so I voted "other". There is not enough information considering who's quality policy we are talking about.

Generally speaking, though, to me it is at the top of the documentation pyramid, so from that standpoint it is important, but after the policy amd manual are written, how often are they actually read?

I selected Other...XYZ is committed to ensuring customer satisfaction in product performance, delivery, and customer support.
Our primary goal at XYZ is to manufacture and supply defect free products to our customers, on time every time.

XYZ will continue to meet or exceed our customers’ expectations through effective quality planning and continual improvement efforts throughout the organization, which are driven by our objectives and regular review and analysis of our management systems.
Our original policy (in bold red) was created to satisfy ISO 1994. We have a banner in the shop with our policy. People were given "quality cards" back in 2000. It was a simple/short enough policy that we expected people to more or less memorize it and be able to quote it back to an auditor. We also had like 10 very fancy objective which were NOT measurable, but they were obviously good enough for PJ and ISO 1994. *shrug* I didn't write them...

I expanded our policy to "comply" with the expectation of ISO 2000. I also did not want to eliminate the "core" of our quality policy.

Do people know the "core" of the quality policy. I believe the answer is yes.

Is the policy effective? Not sure we're still new to measuring and analyzing the effectiveness of our system...

Does it drive the "quality/business" programs, yes. We really do strive for defect-free products, and we do work very hard to ship on-time (or make concessions if we can't).
-------------
Not to sound to rude, but our "quality department/policy" does not run our business or really determine how we make products. Good parts, on-time, and customer satisfaction should be the focus of EVERY company. Depending on your company ISO may just be a seal of approval no matter how hard you work at improving your self. We want more than a certificate, but we're going to run the business as we need to with our with out ISO.

Well, the early results of this poll are in, and while the sample size is small, about 70% of us have said that having a Quality Policy is of little or no value to their organization. Do these results suprise anyone? I, for one, am not surprised.

There are several reasons for this, but one of the reasons I find it of little value is because of the potential redundency between a QP and an organization's Mission Statement. In our case, I find our Quality Policy similar to our Mission Statement, and we put more "stock" into our Mission Statement than we do the Quality Policy. Don't most organizations have Mission Statements established? If so, why couldn't an organization establish a Mission Statement that:

is appropriate to the purpose of the organization (that would almost seem to be a given; why create a Mission Statement that is not apprpriate to the purpose of the organzation),
is communicated and understood within the organization (again, this would seem to be almost academic since most org's are going to want to publicize their Mission Statement if it means anything at all),
provides a framework for establishing and reviewing quality objectives, and
is reviewed for continuing suitability?

These four elements are all requirements of a Quality Policy in the ISO standard. The only element in the ISO requirement that wouldn't seem to fit nicely in an organization's mission statement is to include a commitment to comply with requirements and continually improve the effectiveness of the quality management system.

Do any of you know an organization who has used or has tried to use their Mission Statement as a Quality Policy?

Tom

I didn't do the poll thing because our company (me and my sweetie) don't have a policy....I just do everything I can to best meet my clients needs.

I do however have a comment (anybody surprised at this?).

Regardless of the subject matter of any course I deliver, be it 9K, 14K, 18K, Integrated or whatever, I tell the folks that the policy is no more than a theory or wish that everything else done attempts to bring into reality.

Amazing how well you captured my thoughts. :eek:
Our Quality policy actually states verbatum our mission, vision and values.
It seems like we have two documents that are essentially the same but one is named according to ISO standards and the other to business standards.

It seems to me that under the new standard the Mission statement and the quality policy not only could be the same document - they should be the same document.

JMHO

Craig

Protect and Serve

Protect my :ca: and Serve up the next guy!
:biglaugh:

It seems to me that under the new standard the Mission statement and the quality policy not only could be the same document - they should be the same document.

JMHO

Craig

Once again it comes back to the fact that the word "quality" shouldn't even be in the standard. Treat the standard as a "business" standard then when the ISO Assessor questions where (or what) your "Quality" policy is point them to your current mission statement (Why re-create it under a different title? It's your system.).

According to Tom Peter's a couple of the best managed companies in the world (W.L. Gore and Nordstrom's) don't have reams of documented procedures [and although I'm not positive, they may not even be ISO-certified], but they ensure that every employee understands the company mission and the need for customer satisfaction. The result is that whenever an employee is faced with an off-the-wall situation, they react in a fashion that ensures both that the customer is satisfied and that the company mission accomplished. Isn't this really the direction that ISO 9001:2000 is attempting to direct us?

David:

Yes, I agree. Maybe part of the problem is that Quality is still seen by many as a cost, and one for which it is hard to tell if it is really "value added" or just a necessary expense like a business license. We quality types are responsible for this because we, generally speaking (there are exceptions), have failed to talk in a language that is understood in the boardroom.

Combining the mission statement with the quality policy, AND calling it the mission statement (great idea, btw) might just make all of this quality stuff easier to swallow.

Of course, having a mission statement that is hidden away in a book somewhere is of little use. The examples you cite have made theirs an integral part of the way they conduct business. Its kind of like any other tool, a lot depends on how (or if) its used.

Craig

Any time you mention the quality, executive management thinks "OVERHEAD".

Policy

We will meet and surpass the requirements and expectations of our customers as their supplier, our people as their employer, our suppliers as their customer, and our communities as their neighbor.
(They already had this when I got here and even then the VP was asking for other ideas)

Mission

mission and goals amplify the policy statement:

Customers: We strive to understand our customers and their businesses. We must recognize the value they place on each element of the products and services we offer, and continually improve that value.

Employees: We strive to provide safe working conditions, promote teamwork, involvement and empowerment, and provide an atmosphere which encourages creativity and raises motivation. Our people provide our intelligence and culture, and determine our integrity and reputation.

Suppliers: We strive to understand our suppliers and their needs. We must help them .understand the value we place on each element of the products and services they offer, and through partnership, continually improve that value to better serve our customers.

Community: We strive to be sensitive to our neighbors. We must provide safe products, and use environmentally sound and healthy processes and facilities. We must be conscious of how we affect our surroundings, and strive to be a positive asset to the community.

We've been trying to get "there" for years now. It's been a long battle but we're moving forward. One huge step was getting the systems integrated (5S, Hoshin, CI, FTQ, etc.). With the integration came the Business Operations name and the quality tag wasn't seen anymore.

Randy:

It looks like we are finally going to move towards more integration, as well. How did you start and where, if I may ask?

Using the idea that it is a good idea to go for the low hanging fruit first, I have suggested that one of the first things we should try is reorganizing our procedures and get ALL of them on an intranet. That way we will get an idea of how we should go about setting up security and also find out where we need more linked computers.

Anyway, I like seeing where you started and where you are now as far as a policy/statement go. That approach sure makes more sense, and losing the word "Quality" should help acceptance. Who cares what they call it, anyhow, as long as it gets done?

Craig

I think we follow our quality policy. Maybe not to the letter but the general idea is implemented at all time and that is to make good products. Not too hard to follow your quality policy if it reflects what you try to do everyday. :)

It looks like we are finally going to move towards more integration, as well. How did you start and where, if I may ask?

What really got the ball rolling was 2 items; initiation of 5S and a successful Safety Committee. Can you see where it's going? Where is the term Quality in those 2 initiatives???

The Safety Committee has complete buy-in from the floor and was able to chop Lost-Time injuries by 66% the first year it became active. Employee policing employee type thing - not management.

The 5S stuff caught on with employees being able to implement changes in their areas of responsibility, i.e. welding carts, tool carts, etc.

I took a look at these programs and charted where the QS & ISO stuff crossed the lines (house keeping, work environment, etc.) and also the 12 Guiding Principles (clean work space, 1 touch placement, etc.). Next came the elimination of Internal Audits and the use of Safety Walkthrus, 5S Walkthrus, Process Reviews, etc.

What I believe was the real breakthrough was the push for PDPD (Process Driven, Product Design). It required us to totally rethink our processes.

The Safety Committee has complete buy-in from the floor and was able to chop Lost-Time injuries by 66% the first year it became active. Employee policing employee type thing - not management.


Why was this important to management?

What did they really care?

What information was used to get the buy-in?

What language was used, and why?

*Rethorical questions to promote the flow here. I think I have already answered them in Threads past and Craig H might have missed them. This has come up before.

It seems to me that under the new standard the Mission statement and the quality policy not only could be the same document - they should be the same document.

JMHO

Craig

Craig,

I couldn’t agree more. Our mission statement is in our Policy Document and the objectives in the Policy are taken from the statement, however, we also have a Business Plan yet the KPIs within that document are not those of the Policy. :bonk:

I am having a meeting at our head office tomorrow to try and have the Policy and mission statement rewritten to accuratley reflect the principles of the Business Plan. You see, the objectives in the current Policy are NOT achievable or measurable (and are rather touchy feely). The objectives in the Business Plan ARE measurable and all the departments goals and plans are linked directly too them.

Hope this makes sense. :frust:
Greg B

Craig,

I couldn’t agree more. Our mission statement is in our Policy Document and the objectives in the Policy are taken from the statement, however, we also have a Business Plan yet the KPIs within that document are not those of the Policy. :bonk:

I am having a meeting at our head office tomorrow to try and have the Policy and mission statement rewritten to accuratley reflect the principles of the Business Plan. You see, the objectives in the current Policy are NOT achievable or measurable (and are rather touchy feely). The objectives in the Business Plan ARE measurable and all the departments goals and plans are linked directly too them.

Hope this makes sense. :frust:
Greg B

Greg:

Yeah, in our current climate, and the way we have grown to meet it, that kinda makes sense. Generally NOT, but I know what you mean.

The basic question is: Do we "do" quality because it is a way to get a nice, framed, certificate, or do we "do" the standard because we make sure we have all of our business bases covered?

Again, who cares what the mission statement or quality policy is called? The "upmost document" should be where all the other stuff comes from. ALL OF IT!! Coming from a small, I suspect it is even more important in a large. Having measurable goals is a very big part. Measurable and achievable (with a stretch).

Greg, make the Business plan objectives your 9001 objectives. Unless you have a really freaky upper management you should be OK. It may require a little rewrite, but make it work for one document. Why run a business coming from 2 (or even more) ways? In "real" life, that would be laughable. Make the "uppers" realize that.

KPIs? If thats what is measured, that is what gets done (quote source unknown by me). If you follow what I have said above, the objectives should flow from the "mission statement" and should be measurable.

Coming from more than one set of "objectives (goals, etc)" boarders on (watch the spelling) Scitzophrenia (bad sp?).

What's bad for humans is even worse for groups of them.

Give them ONE set of goals. Period.

Craig

Greg:
The basic question is: Do we "do" quality because it is a way to get a nice, framed, certificate, or do we "do" the standard because we make sure we have all of our business bases covered?
Craig
Craig, I totally Agree and this is what I will be promoting at my next meeting with management. My last company had their certificate for trade with Japan - End of Story. These guys realise that the QMS is primarily a business tool.
Greg:
Greg, make the Business plan objectives your 9001 objectives. Unless you have a really freaky upper management you should be OK. It may require a little rewrite, but make it work for one document. Why run a business coming from 2 (or even more) ways? In "real" life, that would be laughable. Make the "uppers" realize that.
Craig
Craig, Again I agree. My aim is to have the Business plan objectives as the Quality Policy Objectives. They are achievable and are the ultimate goals of everyone in the company. The ones in the current policy (not written by me) are laughable. Her are a few of the six points:
Fosters a company culture which encourages active participation of employees in the continuous improvement of the business, (how do you measure that?)
Allocates sufficient resources to ensure QMAG is continually learning and improving, (What is Sufficient?)
Strives to exceed the requirements of our customers. (again..How to measure and why?).
They are all rather pointless and will definately change.

KPIs? If thats what is measured, that is what gets done (quote source unknown by me). If you follow what I have said above, the objectives should flow from the "mission statement" and should be measurable.
Craig
Craig, Our Key Point Indicators (KPIs) are our measurables Monthly/Quarterly and Annually. They take in Safety, Quality, Production, Human Resources and Finance so all of the company facets are covered.

Thanks for the Input,as always it is welcome.

Greg B

It's not valuable at all, but we have made an honest attempt at communicating to the rest of the organization, gets my vote.

Had to re-write it in plain english for our staff, they were ok with it then and could repeat it at the drop of a hat.

Like any tool used within a Management System, it's usefullness is dependent on how it is utilized.

Need we say more? :agree:

We are the top company in our niche (as rated by annual international sales $$).

Unfortunately our QP is a lofty statement (The central themes are words like "delight" and "innovative" etc) and is often the brunt of sarcastic commentary. Most folks have a copy in their office/cube but senior management's primary directive is to ship product, with no delays.

Quality is basically a secondary aspect of our reactive corporate culture. This excludes compliance requirements of course but the quality department is viewed by some in senior management as a necessary evil.

This is not the view in Quality Systems however but we are a minority.

I voted somewhat valuable.

This is my first contribution to the forums here. It's very helpful to read about and learn from the experiences of others.

cheers

This is my first contribution to the forums here. It's very helpful to read about and learn from the experiences of others.

cheers

Hello, and welcome to the Cove :bigwave: I agree. The Cove has been and still is invaluable to me as well. I keep learning all the time here.

/Claes

In the first place, most organizations really never had a clue to what the '94 standard wanted in a quality policy, hence the new requirements in 9K:2K. I have seen some well thought out ones, both short and long. One org I saw a few months ago had a quality ploicy statement that simply stated "exceed expectations". Another one had a two pager which almost no one could give more that two or three bulleted points.

An excellent one from an automotive audit last month was just a really a nice flow chart that had a center hub,surrounded by, I believe, ten activities or actions covering the various sub-topics from 5.3 and also from their EMS and OH & S issues. Everyone in the facility (900 employees) knew and understood everything that was there, as well as how their job impacted the policy and how the policy guided them during their activities. "If I don't follow these, we will loose customers and we will all be out of work." - EXCELLENT ! !

Earlier last year I addressed this in the Cove, by saying that organizations will probably now have to make the quality policy a lot more specific to their own operations. Some replies stated that you could still parriot the requirements and get by. NOT.

If an organization will give some real thought to exactly WHY they are in business, HOW they want the management, employees and its stakeholders including its customers, suppliers and other partners to VIEW the organization, then a very concise statement - policy - can be developed that is "appropriate to the purpose of the organization". The rest is the "comply and improve" and the "frramework" concerning the "objectives" issues of clause 5.3 b) and c).
Lastly, ensure it is effectively "communicated within the organization" and "reviewed for continuing suitability" 5.3.d) and e). :cool:

Like any tool used within a Management System, it's usefullness is dependent on how it is utilized. A Quality Policy developed for the sake of meeting a 'shall' and/or to look pretty hanging up on a wall is going to be useless.Well now I may get into trouble here, but here goes...
The standard says that you have to have DOCUMENTED STATEMENTS of a Quality Policy and Quality Objectives. This is where it is going to get hairy... We state in our Quality Manual that "Our Quality Management System encompasses our Quality Policy and this manual." Thats it. Our Web site states the following: XYZ Inc. designs, develops and manufactures test equipment, supervisory controls and custom power supplies for commercial and aerospace industries... our policy is to offer electronic products of exceptional quality - quality that extends considerably beyond normal industry standards... to support this policy, we conduct a continuing program of research into the effective application of electronic controls that are reliable, efficient and...competitive.
There are Quality Objectives Posted on the walls of the facility and we have meetings that include the discussion of them along with the requirements of the QMS. Any input to what we have done is greatly appreciated.
Thanks, Paula
Oh, did I mention an RAB Auditor will be observing our Auditor during our assessment? HELP!:eek:

How long would it take you to add the policy stated on your web site and the objectives listed "on the walls of the facility" to your Quality Manual? It seems this would be a fairly simple addition that would tie everything together, and help you sail through that portion of the audit. ;)

Our Quality Policy and Objectives are very valuable to our originzation, however, Management has done a poor job of communicating what the Goals and Objectives are, they feel that if they are posted then they hve done their job. The employyes need to know what we are shooting for (other than to make money) or the goals are pointless as they will have no clue what they need to do to meet the goals.

Well now I may get into trouble here, but here goes...
The standard says that you have to have DOCUMENTED STATEMENTS of a Quality Policy and Quality Objectives. This is where it is going to get hairy... We state in our Quality Manual that "Our Quality Management System encompasses our Quality Policy and this manual." Thats it. Our Web site states the following: XYZ Inc. designs, develops and manufactures test equipment, supervisory controls and custom power supplies for commercial and aerospace industries... our policy is to offer electronic products of exceptional quality - quality that extends considerably beyond normal industry standards... to support this policy, we conduct a continuing program of research into the effective application of electronic controls that are reliable, efficient and...competitive.
There are Quality Objectives Posted on the walls of the facility and we have meetings that include the discussion of them along with the requirements of the QMS. Any input to what we have done is greatly appreciated.
Thanks, Paula
Oh, did I mention an RAB Auditor will be observing our Auditor during our assessment? HELP!:eek:

Paula-

What you are doing sounds good so far, however, have the goals and objectives been communicated to the entire company or just upper management, do you have any measurements that show where you are in relationship to your posted goals and objectives?

As far as the RAB auditor issue don't worry about it, he is not there to assess your system but to assess the auditor assessing your system. He will or at least should not be asking you any questions they will be there to observe your auditor.

Hello Rob Nix and ISO Guy, :)

Rob Nix, I actually did add this Policy statement to our Quality Manual:

"It is the policy of Company X Inc. to maintain customer satisfaction, on time delivery, continual improvement or our products and our Quality Management System."
"Employees are informed during training sessions how their job relates to and how to achieve the Quality Policy."

ISO Guy, since our company consists of 6 people we discuss our policy and objectives on a daily basis in one way or another. It just wasn't spelled out how in the manual. :) Yes we do have measurements in place for the objectives, really still working on how to report on the data gathered. :frust:

The RAB Auditor cancelled so it was just our Auditor. We had 11 very minor nonconformances which I have already responded to. I generated corrective actions for them, made the corrections and held Internal Audits of the CAR's to verify the effectiveness of the corrections. The CAR's will then be closed at the next Management Review Meeting, held after they have been accepted by our Auditor and the Registrar.

Thanks for your responses.
Paula

I replied It's not valuable at all, but we have made an honest attempt at communicating to the rest of the organization.

The policy is readily available and people know where to find it. We do not require our staff to learn it by the letter but we do want them to "get the message". They get it, but the policy in itself has little to do with that. The real reason is an abundance (apart from written procedures) of information about our QMS, why we have it, why we ask them to do this and that and what they have to gain from it.

Try fitting that into a policy...

/Claes

Claes Gefvenberg

i couldn't help stopping at your reply, rather than reading the whole thread till the end.
Contrary to your poll I replied It is valuable { It's highly valuable; the organization rallies around it and leverages it. (Please explain.)} the votes polled 5.26 % against some 57.86 % for the category you polled for.

And have no regrets.

One always proposes a framework before venturing into any creation. The policy directs the construction of that framework and chartering a road map for accomplishing the objectives. Am I right?

If yes, then for aligning a suitable direction for the growth of an entity, an effective policy has to be drafted, and communicated to the real task / torch bearers

Dr Deming also advised so. Don't beat the drum and publicise, but ensure basic commitment. Did he mean something like the phrase: 'barking dogs seldom bite'? He meant "No plain words; Action".

If your, and majority of others' reply {have made an honest attempt at communicating to the rest of the organization) is an indication of our action, then are we doing something only for demonstrating the intention, rather than attempting to define the underlining vision?
I think the policy is very valuable and at the frontline of the battle.

we have a movie song in Hindi maar diya jaye, ya chhor diya jaye, bol tere sath ka salook kiya jaye! 'meaning Shall I attack you, or exhonerate you, say what treatment do you deserve'.
The policy will define that, not the other person's wish.


p thareja

The policy directs the construction of that framework and chartering a road map for accomplishing the objectives. Am I right?

If yes, then for aligning a suitable direction for the growth of an entity, an effective policy has to be drafted, and communicated to the real task / torch bearers
Well... I'm not sure I said otherwise? What I did say was that the policy in itself is but a single document. We need to have it, but it must be supported by further information (People must understand why they are required to do this and that), and yes, positive action (Leadership by example).

/Claes

Claes Gefvenberg

Contrary to your poll I replied It is valuable { It's highly valuable; the organization rallies around it and leverages it. (Please explain.)} the votes polled 5.26 % against some 57.86 % for the category you polled for.

The policy will define that, not the other person's wish.

p thareja


http://Elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=7112&highlight=Quality+Policy

Words on the marquee
will never guarantee
the quality of the movie you see.
Energy 2003 ;)

Words on the marquee
will never guarantee
the quality of the movie you see.
Energy 2003

Well, you're no Poet Laureate, but I have to admit that your words are true, and certainly better than your story-writing ability as previously demonstrated! :bonk: :vfunny:

I voted it is somewhat valuable. Yes we make it known to the employees and now they have an explanation as to why they are here other than just to collect a pay check! It is also incorporated into our Quality Manual and on bullitin boards throughout the company.

Paula

Our company is currently undergoing a massive organizational change. Safety and Quality are the topics talked about everyday.

I would say not valuable at all even though we've done a good job of communicating it throughout the organization. Especially now.... used to be each of the individual plants had their own Quality Policy statement that was tailored to the plant - last year someone (?) decided all the plants should have the same quality policy statement. It went from being several sentences to being a page long to try to accomodate everyone. We can't even attempt to "teach" anyone that page - just hit the high points in communicating it/teaching it. So what purpose does it serve, really, besides satisfying the audit requirement? None, IMHO. Internal and external audits all check to make sure people here know it, but again IMHO it's the entire SYSTEM that indicates whether or not you're "doing quality" correctly. :bonk:

Yes - I posted but what I said was really stupid because I didn't fully read the options (late at night is my best excuse) so I deleted it.

Excellent thread, I must say.

I agree with SteelWoman but would further add that not only is a "policy statement" not valuable, it is detrimental. This is because is hampers credibility. When employees (and management alike) see auditors put excessive concern on people being able to recite verbatim the policy statement, which has little or no impact on day to day operations, then they, by extension, consider the entire ISO system a farce.

If greater emphasis was placed on the effectiveness of the management system, then the INTENT of a quality policy naturally follows.

I'm not surprised by the poll results. Are any of you surprised??

Are any of you surprised??Nah... The poll confirmed what most of us see on a daily basis.
The comments however, are good. :applause: What really interests me is why most of us (myself included) consider the policy to be of little value, because I still feel that a policy has the potential to be useful. We just have to accept that it won't work as a stand-alone document. It must be part of the system, not just "something on the wall".

/Claes

Hello all,
I am relatively new to the forum and I have great respect for the admistration and the members alike, the Cove is an outstanding promotor for Quality......it has certainlly helped and shall continue to help many worldwide. However having said that I am surprised that the majority have so far voted that the quality policy is of minor value....sort of write it and put it on the wall.
I am of a completly different opion. The quality policy is a living document...a decleration (in most cases signed by top management) to conformity with the quality manual as well as all of the QMSs. It is a pledge by the whole company towards its customers, environment, safety, etc........it is the practical instrument which turns management thought into collective action.
I therefore am of the opinion, that a policy is only as valuable as to how effective and efficient it is implemented by everyone in the organisation.

I voted somewhat valuable because a lot of our people have never worked in an automotive factory, and I try to relate how the quality of our parts affects their, and our jobs. How the work they do has an impact on the customer and the consumer buying vehicles. I give each of them a small card with our Quality Policy on it and a synopsis of the main essence of what it means.
They can all relate to their car or truck breaking down and the detrimental effects upon them personally.

Our policy is valuable to our company because it identifies our company-wide metrics. We say that quality, delivery and service are key to our success, and then we have objectives set each year that we work toward.

Our policy is written to meet the KISS principle. It works. :biglaugh: