We are an ISO 9001 registered job shop that has hundreds of job specific work instructions. These are updated as needed when a change is made. We also have a large amount of general work instructions that cover processes that seldom see changes. We have some that have not been revised in 10+ years. The question is when we review these seldom revised work instructions should we change the Effective Date to show that it has been reviewed? I do not see where the standard requires this and feel that if no change are made no action needs to be taken.
ISO 9001 Requirement(s) for the Review of Work Instructions
- Thread starter qcman
- Start date
Richard Regalado
Trusted Information Resource
Re: Review of work instructions
There is no need to stir up a hornet's nest.
I wouldn't change the effective date for something which was made effective 10 years ago.
If I was in-charge, I would notify (or email) the process owners to initiate the review and require them to notify me back once their review is completed. Then, during internal audits, I would randomly check the "slow-changing" work instructions to verify if it's still current.
There is no need to stir up a hornet's nest.
I wouldn't change the effective date for something which was made effective 10 years ago.
If I was in-charge, I would notify (or email) the process owners to initiate the review and require them to notify me back once their review is completed. Then, during internal audits, I would randomly check the "slow-changing" work instructions to verify if it's still current.
If they are so well imbibed by your personnel, and when you review them and find them still good to date, think of removing them from documented procedures. Go Lite.....
Last edited:
Richard Regalado
Trusted Information Resource
I would not let go of documented procedures no matter how "perfect" the processes they are describing. People come and go. People grow old and fade into the sunset. Having documented procedures make training greenhorns easier.
I like this approach. A seasoned documented procedure can become a training material and this need not be under document control ~~~
No plans to eliminate any of these for the stated reasons. A customer commented during an audit that the WI we were looking did not appear to have been reviewed in 8+ years. I stated the process was still effective and did not need changing neither did the WI. He mentioned under TS you had to review all documents every 3 years to which I replied we are not TS. Just thought I would throw this out there and get some other views.
qcman,
Archive them so they remain retrievable until, perhaps, they are resurrected and updated by a future quality plan.
John
Richard Regalado
Trusted Information Resource
Agree with John. Archive but show evidence of regular say annual review.
Off-topic: "resurrected" is very timely today
John.
qcman,
You could maintain a separate list of process owners and not put any names on the documents themselves.
Otherwise you are forever updating documents as staff move on or ownership changes.
John