Business process map - Please Review my Process Map and Turtle Diagram

Hi, its the first time I have posted, could you have a look at my process map and one of my Turtle diagrams and give me your opinions on the format, I have got to introduce one QMS for three manufacturing sites At the moment two of the sites are TS registered the 3rd has only just started production. It is my intention to have a turtle diagram for each of the processes identified on the process map.

I would appreciate any comments

Brave attempt

phomer said:

Hi, its the first time I have posted, could you have a look at my process map and one of my Turtle diagrams and give me your opinions on the format, I have got to introduce one QMS for three manufacturing sites At the moment two of the sites are TS registered the 3rd has only just started production. It is my intention to have a turtle diagram for each of the processes identified on the process map.

I would appreciate any comments

Click to expand...

Another information systems support process!
Sorry, my humour, but I don't see it as a process.See earlier threads.

Just one general comment - it seems to be based around the standard (and its clauses) rather than what your organization does - and so it tells me (as an outsider) nothing about your business and how you work - the main aim of a process interrelationship diagram.

Re the turtle diagram - again change management doesn't exist as a process. It is an outcome of something else - e.g. introducing a new model, business planning, kaizen.

Unless you clearly identify what you do and where it fits in then it is difficult to capture it in an interrelationship diagram.

My recommendation is to start with the core business processes IN YOUR TERMS and then try to map it out. If you feel it necessary to check that against the standard you can do that after the map has been agreed internally.

Thanks for the input

Paul thanks for your reply.

Two questions,
1, when reading up on several sources all indicate that the business process map can be created to suit your business which I believe this one does which is why I chose the ISO 9001:2000 process model, it shows the input which is customer requirements, our key processes, and the output which is customer satisfaction. I realise it follows the system but as a tier 1 automotive supplier it is how we work.
so why does this not tell you about our organisation does?

2. Change control is vital to our business which why I included it in the process map.
It has an owner
It is defined.
It is documented
There are major linkages to all aspects of the business.

It is my belief that it is a very important process for our business.

Why should I not identify it as such?

I'm very interested in understanding your views

Thanks
Paul

To suit you - yes

I am already (mentally) girding my loins for another kicking as my views are not necessarily the same as other covers.

You are right to document your processes exactly as you see fit. As an outsider I will always question if it doesn't seem to be relevant. Please take them in the spirit they are intended.

Manage customers - very few companies are in this fortunate position. Most organizations have processes for "accepting customer orders." Similarly "project management" does not exist as a process, it is part of another process such as "introducing new products to the market" or "improving our infrastructure". Similarly "change management" is not part of manufacturing" but is another part of the "introducing new products."

To explain what I mean I will have a go at a changed version of your process map and then post it as an alternative - no time now as I have a 3 hour drive ahead.

Thanks

Paul.

I have taken it in the way it was intended I just wanted a more in depth explaination,
. I think that the big thing TS has done for me is to have the ability to choose the processes that have a high impact on our business and give them a greater focus, i.e change control has a big effect in new project intro. current production and after market, and some of our customers have asked for it to be included in our business map due to importance they put on it.

I look forward to your input on my map.

Tatty at the edges - but I think the idea is sound

Belatedly here is my attempt at describing how a process interrelationship could look. There are two slides - the first is the overall map. The second is a click through to the new product introduction process. It isn't based on any company and there are many other processes that would be linked from the overall map - never quite as far down as IS management though.

As ever any views gratefully received.

Process map

Phomer !
Take a look at these ones, maybe they help as well.
György

Business Map

Hi phomer,
Please see attached files.
When I raised my draft copies I was told they looked too busy, they looked similiar to yours (no offence intended).

Our auditor suggested that if I didn't put in details, just process steps, that was all he could audit. I took his advice and also used the minimum number of words.

Our Quality Manual & Business Process are one & the same.
We have just been recommended for TS2 and are vehicle converters in the UK. The attachments were auditted and accepted by the BSI.
Possibly they may help you.
They were raised on a progam called Smartdraw which I find easy to use, cheap and they give a free reader download which means you only buy one and control is simple. We don't provide printers to the shop floor!

Good luck. I found the advice received from the respondents helpful, but I did have to clarify my questions, more than once!

Anthonyl

Paul Simpson said:

Belatedly here is my attempt at describing how a process interrelationship could look. There are two slides - the first is the overall map. The second is a click through to the new product introduction process. It isn't based on any company and there are many other processes that would be linked from the overall map - never quite as far down as IS management though.

As ever any views gratefully received.

Click to expand...

Paul

Dare I ask... what do you see as the benefit of this sort of diagram? Why do you think that people produce them? Is it so that (i) employees can learn something about the organisation they didn't know before, (ii) it will help staff do their job better, or (iii) they can meet some (unexplained) requirement in ISO9001:2000?

How many such pictures have you seen which add value to an organisation?

Just picking up a few points from your example (but similar comments could equally be applied to the vast majority of such maps - by the way, is it better to describe them as "system maps" rather than as "process maps", which as you know I think of as a flowchart of a process?):

1 "Monitoring & Measuring" is often done as an intrinsic part of another process rather than as a separate process. Even if it is a separate process, it will (or should) affect the process(es) being monitored (otherwise why do it?) - so there should be an arrow going up as well.

2 In the same way, "Research and Development" and "Planning and Logistics" may well have an impact on the "Provision of Resources", so there is another arrow or two needed.

3 "Provision of Resources" may impact on "Monitoring & Measuring", so another arrow is needed.

4 "Fulfilling repeat orders" may affect "Enquiry and Order receipt" if the production line can't cope and you have to quote longer delivery times...

My concern is that at the one extreme the system map will have the sort of missing links I mention above, and at the other you will need an n-dimensional picture which is so complex that it would be unusable. I personally don't see any benefit in either, other than just to satisfy an external assessor, which cannot be a good reason for doing it.

In any organisation, "process interaction" is far more involved than this sort of picture can show in any sort of accurate and usable format, and the "sequence of processes" as it is usually depicted makes no reference to the fact that many instances of each process may be happening at the same time. If everything was linear, you probably wouldn't need managers, and certainly not managers who understand what is required for good process management.

An alternative approach? Our customers use a simple numbering system to define a small number of process groups ("2 Getting Work", "3 Doing Work" etc), and processes with each (eg "2-1 Respond to an Enquiry", "2-2 Prepare a Tender") which implies a logical sequence, and define the processes (using "process maps"!) which link to other processes from the relevant tasks. They only draw a picture if they have an unenlightend assessor.

So ... grateful or not?!

In my view these maps give me the freedom to show an external customer the basic idea of the processes involved in producion of their vehicles. Unlike the old naval manuals that were cumbersome, often meaningless to those not directly involved or of no real interest and stayed unused on a shelf ( and I wrote 30 years ago).

Linked to each stage of the flow map are the relevant training plans, procedures, work instructions, control plans, H & S instruction/advice, forms, BOS, SPC and drawings. These are available for the internal customer (or the more interested external) who would like to know the details and just have to click on the process they are interested in.

I like the freedom of expression that TS2 allows - at least all manuals are not the same anymore. Each company can show itself of in it's own unique way.