The Elsmar Cove Wiki More Free Files The Elsmar Cove Forums Discussion Thread Index Post Attachments Listing Failure Modes Services and Solutions to Problems Elsmar cove Forums Main Page Elsmar Cove Home Page
Miner's MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) Blog 
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Forum > Common Quality Assurance Processes and Tools > Definitions, Acronyms, Abbreviations and Interpretations
Forum Username

Elsmar Cove Forum Visitor Notice(s)

Wooden Line

Shall vs. Should - Definitions - Interpretation of "shall" and "should"

Wooden Line
Search the Elsmar Cove
Search Elsmar
Monitor the Elsmar Forum
Follow Marc & Elsmar
Elsmar Cove Forum RSS Feed  Marc Smith's Google+ Page  Marc Smith's Linked In Page   Marc Smith's Elsmar Cove YouTube Page  Marc Smith's Facebook Page  Elsmar Cove Twitter Feed
Elsmar Cove Groups
Elsmar Cove Google+ Group  Elsmar Cove LinkedIn Group  Elsmar Cove Facebook Group
Donate and $ Contributor Forum Access
Courtesy Quick Links

Links that Elsmar Cove visitors will find useful in your quest for knowledge:

Howard's
International Quality Services
Marcelo Antunes'
SQR Consulting
Bob Doering's
Correct SPC - Precision Machining

NIST's Engineering Statistics Handbook
IRCA - International Register of Certified Auditors
SAE - Society of Automotive Engineers
Quality Digest Portal
IEST - Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology
ASQ - American Society for Quality

Related Topic Tags
5.5.2 - management representative, definitions, iso 9001 - quality management systems, interpretations
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Content Display Modes
  #1  
Old 15th July 2002, 07:25 PM
Jimmy Olson

 
 
Posts: 331
Let Me Help You Shall vs. Should - Definitions - Interpretation of "shall" and "should"

Hello everyone. What is the general interpertation of "shall" and "should" in standard? Is "should" as loose as it sounds? My understanding is that "shall" means must be and that "should" is just a recommendation and doesn't really need to be done. I'm sure it probably is this simple, but when it comes to standards you can never be certain.

Last edited by Jimmy Olson; 10th February 2004 at 11:23 PM.

Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 16th July 2002, 03:46 AM
M Greenaway's Avatar
M Greenaway

 
 
Posts: 1,650
Richard

I would agree with your interpretation with respect to ISO9001. QS9000 however slightly tightens the noose by saying that 'shalls' must be done, and 'shoulds' must be done or a suitable alternative approach.
Sponsored Links

  #3  
Old 16th July 2002, 10:16 AM
Howard Atkins's Avatar
Howard Atkins

 
 
Posts: 2,914
But QS is dead.

TS/ISO 16949 has the following comment
Quote:
The word “should” indicates a recommendation. Paragraphs marked “NOTE” are for guidance in understanding or clarifying the associated requirement.
The only should not in a note is
Quote:
4.2.3.1 Engineering specifications
The organization shall have a process to assure the timely review, distribution and implementation of all customer
engineering standards/specifications and changes based on customer-required schedule. Timely review should be
as soon as possible, and shall not exceed two working weeks.
  #4  
Old 16th July 2002, 10:30 AM
M Greenaway's Avatar
M Greenaway

 
 
Posts: 1,650
Dead but not quite buried yet, 4 years and counting !
  #5  
Old 16th July 2002, 10:56 AM
db's Avatar
db

 
 
Posts: 2,574
Typically, a "shall" means 'this you will do, and you will do it this way'. A "should" means 'this you will do, and you decide how to do it'. It is often called a "shall with flexibility".
  #6  
Old 16th July 2002, 12:02 PM
Mike S.

 
 
Posts: 1,872
Well, IMHO, if ISO-9000, 9001, or 9004 does not specifically give the official ISO definition of a certain term they use (such as “should”) the most reasonable thing to do is use the normal, everyday (dictionary?) definition based on the context of the sentence. To me “should” does not mean you have to do something, or 'this you will do, and you decide how to do it' or something “must be done or a suitable alternative approach”. Where do those definitions come from? There must be a reason they use “should” instead of “shall”. To me, should means “ought to, but don’t have to”, i.e. “You should get your Mother a gift on Mother’s Day” or “you should check your tire pressure every week”. Or, as Howard said, recommendation is a good synonym.

As I said, JMHO.
  #7  
Old 16th July 2002, 01:23 PM
Mike S.

 
 
Posts: 1,872
Jim,

Maybe I'm just being unreasonable, but it seems stupid to me that they (ISO) can't include all applicable "special" definitions in one of the 3 documents (ISO-9000, 9001, and 9004). Those 3 documents are commonly sold as a package and I assumed, wrongly it would seem, that especially ISO-9000 "fundamentals and vocabulary" would include all of the necessary definitions. How many people even know that "ISO 9000 Introduction and Support Package: Guidance on the Terminology used in ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 9004:2000" exists? I didn't, but maybe I'm a dummy. How many "extra" publications does one need to understand these "standards"? Am I the only one who thinks this is nuts?

Well, at least I can agree witht he second definition they give.
  #8  
Old 16th July 2002, 01:52 PM
Mike S.

 
 
Posts: 1,872
Jim,

Where would one get a copy of "ISO 9000 Introduction and Support Package: Guidance on the Terminology used in ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 9004:2000" ? Is it available free on the web or is it another money-maker for ISO?
Reply

Lower Navigation Bar
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Forum > Common Quality Assurance Processes and Tools > Definitions, Acronyms, Abbreviations and Interpretations

Do you find this discussion thread helpful and informational?


Bookmarks

Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors (Members) and 1 Unregistered Guest Visitors)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Forum Search
Display Modes Rate Thread Content
Rate Thread Content:

Forum Posting Settings
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Discussion Threads
Discussion Thread Title Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post or Poll Vote
Histogram Interpretation when a process is "running too high" or "running too low"? gel270 Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 4 5th July 2011 08:59 PM
"Value" and "Overhead(s)" of implementation of "CSV - Validation requirements" v9991 Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 1 22nd November 2009 06:31 PM
Various Processes - "Management", "planning" & "feedback", oh my! irish01 Documentation Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 5 22nd January 2009 08:33 AM
X bar R Charts - d2 constant, "g" and "m" definitions Morten Lunde Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3 7th May 2008 11:24 PM
What do "OAI" "VAI" and "NAI" used in FDA QSIT manual mean in inspections? TJG954 - 2009 ISO 13485 and ISO 14969 - Medical Devices - Quality Management Systems 3 25th June 2007 12:55 AM



The time now is 11:05 AM. All times are GMT -4.
Your time zone can be changed in your UserCP --> Options.


   


Marc Timothy Smith - Elsmar.com
8466 LeSourdsville-West Chester Road, Olde West Chester, Ohio 45069-1929
513 341-6272
NOTE: This forum uses "cookies".