Quality Manual Organization and Structure including Numbering
As I have made no bones about, I see a Quality Manual (which I prefer to call a Systems Manual) as a regurgitation of the standard with some 'company specific comments' and references to the fulfilling company procedures.
I have seen many write about 'making the quality manual yours' and such. I'm not sure I've seen such a manual in many years. Thus - the reason for the Poll.
Comments in replies are welcomed, but please take a minute and 'Vote' in the poll, too. Thanks!
EDIT ADD: Just to clarify things, when I started this thread it was 2001 - It was at the end of the days when auditors said "Show me where you address this in your quality manual and procedures." In the 'good old days' you would earn yourself a writeup if something was not addressed within the manual even if you did not do that (by exclusion or whatever).
It is now 2004 so many things have changed, one of which is quality manual content expectations. Thus, my initial comment above is no longer is 'true'.
__________________
A Search is a terrible thing to waste!
One Test is Worth 1000 Expert Opinions - The plural of anecdote is not data - Correlation does not imply Causation
We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. - Unknown
Last edited by Marc; 27th July 2004 at 09:49 AM.
Reason: Add clarification
|
Threaded Mode
