I have attached a copy of my proposed quality manual for anyone willing to take a look. Obviously I have removed any ref to names(I hope) :agree1: The consultant my company retained prior to my arrival suggested a two-tier systems whereas the manual also contains the procedures and is accompanied by all relevant appendices, forms, etc...

Am I on the right track? :confused: Yes? No? Why or why not? Thanks everyone!

I do not know what the upload will look like but my layout has the coorect page breaks etc...

EDIT: Properties removed by request of author.

Marc

Hokieman,

It looks pretty good.

You may want to regurgitate each section of the standard in each section just before the verbiage you have laid out. This will prevent the auditor from questioning anything that you have not made a statement about.

Otherwise, Just go through each section with the standard and ask yourself if you have covered each point in the manual.

Format and detail look good. You have kept it nice and to the point without a lot of "fluff" getting in the way.

Carl-

Always fun to read someone else's manual. Got a lot crammed into 11 pages. I only spent about 10 minutes reading it. Initial observations are that it looks pretty good. Again, I didn't check everything against the requirements in the standard, but I do have some feedback:

1. in 1.0, if you are going to have an exclusion, you are supposed to explain it. This is done in 7.3, so just copy and paste.........
2. overall, I'm not sure that the references to procedures is explained really well. Most auditors are looking for a reference to the procedure number while reading the manual. Since the procedures are included with the manual, maybe you could make that more clear in 4.0.
3. page 5, minor typo -- It says CNC and then NC. Think it is supposed to say CNC.
4. 7.2.2: I noted in other sections that the manual says who does the work. In 7.2.2, this is not said. Since the manual and procedures are together, I think you need this kind of detail. There may be other instances of this, and I did not pick up on those.
5. 7.6: says calibration within 3 days of due date. Don't know how many tools and gauges you have to calibrate, but don't miss the date! You may want to consider more time, like a week or calibrate within the month due.
6. There are several references in the document to Appendices A-C. Be sure those are accurate, esp. the one for management review, since the manual does not list the required inputs and outputs. These need to be in that Appendix!

Again, just a quick snapshot. I did not pull the ISO standard out and do comparisons section by section. I would have to charge for that!! :cool:

--Jodi

Thanks for your time Carl! That's encouraging but I am confused over this two-tiered stuff. Every QMS I have seen has the manual, L2(procedures) followed by L3(WI). Our WI's are basically an operation sheet that accompanies the order. Granted our Co only has about 45 employees but am I trying to make more out of this than I should. Could it be this simple?

Thanks QG! I will gladly pay you tomorrow for a hamburger today! :D Remember Popeye? I must eat more spinach to do ISO work....

Hokieman,

There is no requirement for the levels of documentation.

as long as you have procedures for the required elements and have evidence to support you are doing what you say, you are golden.

You may want a bit more detail as you go through the other documentation and you ned to keep "polishing" a little, but I see nothing wrong with your current track.

You can show evidence the employees have been trained and document policies and procedures beyond that. Less is more in my book.

Carl-

Thanks for your time Carl! That's encouraging but I am confused over this two-tiered stuff. Every QMS I have seen has the manual, L2(procedures) followed by L3(WI). Our WI's are basically an operation sheet that accompanies the order. Granted our Co only has about 45 employees but am I trying to make more out of this than I should. Could it be this simple?Let me reinforce what Carl Keller says by adding:
Every organization is different. Part of the difference is in how complicated or simple the processes which comprise the operation have to be.

Smaller or less complicated organizations can get by with one or two-page flow charts to describe their organization. Other organizations may need a 100 page manual and file cabinets filled with Procedures and work instructions to adequately describe their processes.

The ultimate test is if a comparative stranger can look through your Quality Manual and high level procedures (Level 2 in a three tier system) and understand what the organization does and how it plans to do it efficiently.

Thanks for the info Wes! :applause:

Thanks for the info Wes! http://elsmar.com/Forums/images/smilies/appl.gifThis next bit of stuff is strictly personal opinion and is not intended to impugn your draft manual in any way, shape or form.

I find that when I read a manual written in the impersonal third person and passive voice, it has no spark or feel to give me the impression the writer or the organization have a passion for quality.

Compare these paragraphs to similar ones in your manual (I have omitted some in the interest of space):

0.3 Corporate Vision

________ Aerospace is a company built by engineers with a passion for aerospace engineering and design. Our core business is developing turnkey engineering packages, installation kits, technical documentation, and product support.
Our Quality Policy is simple. "We are committed to exceeding the expectations of customers worldwide by providing complete, reliable products, service, and support based on industry standards."

0.4 Corporate Values



We listen to our employees, customers, and partners.
We support our customers, employees, and partners.
We embrace quality in all we do.
We believe in empowerment with accountability.
We are committed to instruction and education for our customers, partners, suppliers, and employees.
Employees are our most valuable assets.
We invest in our employees.
We treat our employees as we want them to treat our customers.
We want to be known as a loyal and supportive associate to our channel partners.
Teamwork is of utmost importance.
We want to be recognized as socially and environmentally conscious.
We consider integrity and ethics in all business transactions paramount in importance.
0.5 Reference Documents


ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001-2000 The latest revision of the internationally accepted standard for quality.
ORDER 8110.42A PARTS MANUFACTURER APPROVAL PROCEDURES The latest revision of the procedures for the evaluation and approval of Parts Manufacturer Approval (PMA) for Replacement and Modification Parts. (Issued by the FAA.)


1 Scope and application
1.1 Scope

This manual is a general overview of the quality philosophy and practices of ___________ Aerospace. Our policies relate to an “interrelated community of affected parties.”
(We recognize none of the entities listed exists in a vacuum, but each is directly or indirectly affected by every action ___________ Aerospace takes. Further, ___________ Aerospace is affected by actions any of the others make.)

Regulatory bodies and agencies (FAA, JAA, et al)
Customers
Suppliers
Employees
General Public
A major aspect of our quality policy is determining the responsibilities and functions of ___________’s management in formulating these policies, then creating and implementing procedures to carry them out.

We use a documented and objective process to measure and evaluate the effectiveness of each quality procedure in meeting or exceeding the expectations of each member of the “interrelated community of affected parties.”

Our Quality Plan and Policy extend to ___________ Aerospace operations worldwide.

1.1.1 General methodology of Quality Plan

We use a general methodology in our Quality Plan. We follow eight general steps in our organization’s activities.

Make a general plan for an activity (process)
Determine the inputs necessary to carry out the process
Identify the outputs expected from the process
Review plan, inputs, and outputs – do they coincide with the need?
Implement the plan as a process
Validate the input and output match the plan
Set up controls to monitor process for adherence to plan
Evaluation of process for possible improvement
My goal when I created my first Quality Manual as well as when I created my most recent was to make a readable document that would give outsiders and employees a clear, understandable picture of what we do and why.

I am very persuaded to include the concept of including flow charts and process maps in the Quality Manual. I have incorporated them for years in Procedures and Work Instructions, but, frankly, it never occurred to me to include them in the Quality Manual until I read about the practice here in the Cove. My next revision may very well follow that practice.

I like and appreciate the education I get here in the Cove by reading the input of such a wide pool of practicioners.

Wes,

You stated, "I am very persuaded to include the concept of including flow charts and process maps in the Quality Manual."

Would you provide a copy of this information?

Thanks! :applause:

Wes,

You stated, "I am very persuaded to include the concept of including flow charts and process maps in the Quality Manual."

Would you provide a copy of this information?

Thanks! :applause:Start with these threads
QMS Quality Manual - Boss Wants a 4 Page Manual - What to Do?
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=4866&page=1&pp=100
Are there any flowchart type quality manuals available for viewing?
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=8140
and I'm sure others will jump in next week with suggestions for other sources,
too. The point is to let your imagination work to create your own manual once you understand that a manual does NOT have to be a stuffy regurgitation of the Standard.

It's interesting to note how the first thread evolved over years to be more understanding and accepting of shorter manuals.

For everyone:
There is an incredible amount of information available here in the Cove. It is all searchable. Make an effort to learn how to be proficient in searching. One of the most valuable "behind the scenes" activities of Marc Smith is his continual review of titles for threads and posts and his effort in retitling to make them more meaningful to the content of the thread and therefore more searchable with Google.

Hi Hokieman

I notice that you took out the company name throughout the document but if you click (in Word) file-properties you can see the author details including your name (I assume) and the company name. You may want to change this and upload again if you would rather the company not be identified.

Hope this helps.

Cheers

Andy

Wes,

You stated, "I am very persuaded to include the concept of including flow charts and process maps in the Quality Manual."

Would you provide a copy of this information?

Thanks! :applause:


wes have you done this yet as i would be very interested to see a consise QM with procedures in 1 document. The QM that was posted above seemed to be half and half.

I know this is a big ask for my first question :eek:

Quote: (Originally Posted by MarkJoel) Wes,

You stated, "I am very persuaded to include the concept of including flow charts and process maps in the Quality Manual."

Would you provide a copy of this information?

Thanks! http://elsmar.com/Forums/images/smilies/appl.gif
wes have you done this yet as i would be very interested to see a consise QM with procedures in 1 document. The QM that was posted above seemed to be half and half.

I know this is a big ask for my first question http://elsmar.com/Forums/images/smilies/eek.gif
Alas, no. My most recent Quality manual was for an aerospace company to help it achieve FAA-PMA (Parts Manufacturer Approval) and the FAA troops I dealt with were not in the least interested in flow charts in the manual (I combined both ISO9k2k and FAA requirements using ISO9k2k numbering in one manual with a cross-index grid for ease of an auditor for either "Standard" being able to locate whatever he wanted. This is a tactic I strongly recommend for those using their own numbering system who don't want to use the stifling numbering system of a Standard. Merely tuck the cross-index grid in an appendix to your manual. My reasoning was "why irritate the auditor on purpose by making him search through your manual?")

The main problem I encountered was that my FAA inspector/auditor wanted very specific prescriptive language and wording, not flow charts. In my Procedures which had to pass muster with FAA, I used BOTH prescriptive language and explanatory flow charts. Others dealing with FAA personnel (or any regulator) will tell you that you can't "go over an inspector's head" nor "strongarm" the FAA because you are NOT their customer - the public is.

When I get the opportunity to help another organization write a manual, I will certainly use flow charts if I am allowed to and will share what I create with the rest of you.

So, if you want to see it sooner, rather than later - tout my service ( Wes Bucey offers service as "Strategy Advisor" - Seeking Case Studies for Book (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=9117)) to organizations!