Do you control your policies with control numbers?

[SRivers]

Good afternoon All,
My company has been TS certified since 2003 and recently completed one of our bi-anual audits. A question was raised about our TS Policies manual. The policies are not 'controlled' with control numbers. They reflect only the revision date at the top of the form. The auditor asked why we didn't control the policies. As you can imagine, all of us had that 'deer in the head lights look', silently asking ourselves why don't we? Is it a requirement that they be controlled? Do we consider them living documents? No one knew! So, my question to you fine folks is this...." Do your policies have to be controlled with control numbers?" Before I assign control numbers to all those policies I want to make sure this guy just isn't yanking our chain because 'he' feels they should be.
Thanks for all your replies ahead of time!
Susan
Laurinburg NC

"Action without philosopy is a lethal weapon; Philosophy without action is worthless." ~ Soichiro Honda

 

[Boscoeee]

Good afternoon All,
My company has been TS certified since 2003 and recently completed one of our bi-anual audits. A question was raised about our TS Policies manual. The policies are not 'controlled' with control numbers. They reflect only the revision date at the top of the form. The auditor asked why we didn't control the policies. As you can imagine, all of us had that 'deer in the head lights look', silently asking ourselves why don't we? Is it a requirement that they be controlled? Do we consider them living documents? No one knew! So, my question to you fine folks is this...." Do your policies have to be controlled with control numbers?" Before I assign control numbers to all those policies I want to make sure this guy just isn't yanking our chain because 'he' feels they should be.
Thanks for all your replies ahead of time!
Susan
Laurinburg NC

"Action without philosopy is a lethal weapon; Philosophy without action is worthless." ~ Soichiro Honda

IMHO - The Standard does not require you to have "control numbers"

Having said that I have found it useful to number my procedures and work instruction in alignment with the Standard they are written to satisfy. This make it easier for employees to find what they are looking for when it comes to instructions and forms. Additionally, it talks to the Auditor's frame of reference as well.

I am sure others will comments.

 

[AndyN]

Susan:

Don't do anything. Why is it that this is the first time this has come up since 2003? The requirements haven't changed!

Is your auditor saying it isn't working? Is there any evidence of ineffective controls?

Sounds like a chain yanking ( as you put it!)

 

[ScottK]

what Andy said.
It's been fine for 5 years, why is there an issue now?

was this a new auditor to your organization?
We all know different auditors have different "interpretations" of different standards.

 

[db]

As Ralph indicated, there is no requirement in the Technical Specification about control numbers. You would have to check to see if your own documentation puts that requirement there.

But not having control numbers is a totally different thing than not being controlled. In order for a document to be controlled, it must meet the requirements of 4.2.3 a-g. Well, actually your document controll procedure must ensure the document meets those points. If, through your procedure, your policies (which are not required either, btw) are controlled, then there should be no problem.......

Unless, however, your document control procedure states that all controlled documents will be identified with a control number.

 

[Wes Bucey]

Good afternoon All,
My company has been TS certified since 2003 and recently completed one of our bi-anual audits. A question was raised about our TS Policies manual. The policies are not 'controlled' with control numbers. They reflect only the revision date at the top of the form. The auditor asked why we didn't control the policies. As you can imagine, all of us had that 'deer in the head lights look', silently asking ourselves why don't we? Is it a requirement that they be controlled? Do we consider them living documents? No one knew! So, my question to you fine folks is this...." Do your policies have to be controlled with control numbers?" Before I assign control numbers to all those policies I want to make sure this guy just isn't yanking our chain because 'he' feels they should be.
Thanks for all your replies ahead of time!
Susan
Laurinburg NC

"Action without philosopy is a lethal weapon; Philosophy without action is worthless." ~ Soichiro Honda

One of the most often used phrases around the Cove when discussing auditor "rulings, observations, NC, OFI, etc." will be
"Show me the shall!"
[a citation to a specific clause in the Standard being audited which applies to the situation]
which is the demand/command an auditee should ALWAYS make to the auditor who presents a "requirement" unfamiliar to the auditee.

The second part of that demand is
"What will you expect from us to cure this and when?"
[if the citation to the Standard is verified and you agree to the auditor's interpretation.]

The final part of this little drama is WHEN should the interchange between auditor and auditee take place? -
ANSWER: Ideally, before the auditor leaves your building.

On Topic: I don't know of any clause in either TS 16949 or ISO 9001:2000 which would be applicable to this statement by your auditor. It appears to me the auditor may have a radically different definition of "control"as it applies to the Standard than my own definition or that of most quality professionals I know. As part of my questioning of the original auditor, I'd ask for a written definition of "control" as he thinks it applies to meeting the Standard.

 

[Coury Ferguson]

I agree with everyone that has posted the response that: "The auditor is pulling your chains."

I would also like to add to Wes's post: There is no requirement in AS9100 either. I can't say it also applies to ISO13485, but most likely it doesn't.

 

[SRivers]

Thanks Everyone for your replys. They solidified my thoughts on the matter. This was a new auditor for us and I have to say that it was a totally different style than we had seen in any past audit. There was no evident rhyme or reason to his scattered audit. We ended up with two minors on the TS side and one minor on the ISO side. All in all, not too shabby. OH! He made a comment that kind of suprised me. He stated that one of the minors on the TS side should actually be a room for improvement BUT he couldn't write room for improvements on the TS side...only the ISO side. We've had many auditors give us room for improvements on the TS side in the past. Was this dude correct? Is a room for improvement not allowed on the TS side? Strange. But like I said earlier, this guy was different than anything we had seen before and I am very new to the whole TS/ISO management rep role. It's gonna be a fun ride. lol Have a wonderful day everyone!
Susan

 

[AndyN]

Susan

What's the 'ISO side' and 'TS side' your auditor is referring to? Specific requiements of TS compared to the 'general' requirements of ISO 9001?

TS is TS, the auditor should treat them all equally, surely?

 

[SRivers]

Hi Andy,
My company makes both automotive and off road clutch/clutch component parts for Honda. The audits usually are seperate for those two sections. The automotive parts are subject to the TS/ISO standards but the ATV sections are only subject to the ISO portion. We are also ISO 14000 but thankfully I do not have my hands in that one. Wheww!
Susan