Hey all,
Currently, in our company there are two plans with respective Quality Manual they owned. My boss said one day it is better to use just one manual to cover these two manuals, and let me go through& make it. I know it would be easy to achieve if I like. Just say same thing (according to the situation in these two plants) for one clause twice. But it looks bad, is not it?

So I would like to look for some advice on it, any one here can help me?

Hey all,
Currently, in our company there are two plans with respective Quality Manual they owned. My boss said one day it is better to use just one manual to cover these two manuals, and let me go through& make it. I know it would be easy to achieve if I like. Just say same thing (according to the situation in these two plants) for one clause twice. But it looks bad, is not it?

So I would like to look for some advice on it, any one here can help me?If you mean you have two facilities which perform similar tasks, and both are owned by the same organization, it seems reasonable to me to have one single manual for both.

Rather than have similar clauses defining the differences between the two facilities, keep the manual at a level where it describes the similarities and cover the differences with specific Procedures and work instructions which apply to one facility or the other.

This would be similar to many organizations which have scattered sites, but perform similar activites at each site (ranging from foundries to restaurant chains.)

Hi Wes Bucey,
Thanks for reply. But I think the situation I am facing now is not as same as what you mentioned. The two plants our company owned produce different parts and have obviously different processes. But there are the several "public sector" within two plant, just like finance, HR, LGT etc. Now they both have their own ISO9K certs, I think my boss wanna merg the two QMS and replace two certs by one.

I think the project will be a bit more difficult than what first appears. If both plants have their own processes, then the combined manual will have to include the description of the processes of both plants. I would recommend that, should you do this, where it is convienent you generic wording that applies to both plants. Any plant-specific information be called out so the reader knows which plant that information belongs to.

At my previeous employer we had a similar situation. We had (at peak) some 15 plants domestically and internationally. Our plants ranged from "can't spell ISO" to full regristration (9001:1994). I owned or had significant influence in the complete system (including the calibration!).

We had a "Parent" quality manual that was essentially written for the Corporate HQ, but each of our plants could tailor the manual and procedures for their respective operations. In case of a dispute between the two sets of manuals/procedures, the parent system had authority. Since I was Corporate, I worked with each plant to set up their system, cover what they did at that plant, and not have a conflict with the parent documentation.

We had a single cert with attachments.

What you are seeking is the best way (my opinion) to achieve overall consistency. Cooperation is the key to making it work.

Hershal

Hi,

I merged the manuals of five companies into one certificate. It is certainly doable. Part of the benefits are having one set of documentation to control, one management review for all divisions and one bill from the registrar (one document review instead of five).

Within the manual, I used tables to highlight the differences. We only issued 5 mandatory procedures which were generic for all 5 companies.

It worked out well. No minor or major nonconformances at the ISO 9001:2000 audit.

Danny