Randy said:
Somebody submitted a "1 page" manual a bit back and I use a copy of it in my 9K training courses as an example. Occasionally you can hear an @ss hit the floor or a jaw smack a table when they see it. The 15 page manual that was submitted is also anothe example I use.
I can see the light switch flip "on" with many of my students when they realize that the manual doesn't have to look like an encyclopedia.
I have to agree with Randy, I always thought you had to follow the ISO format until recently.
I had an "eye opening experience" concenring how to write quality manuals it came about when I wrote the initial draft of our new quality manual it was in the standard QM form you see everywhere else and presented it to my President for review and comments.
He came back with the following questions:
1. Why is the manual so long? (I thought to myself to meet ISO requirements the manual was over 60 pages).
2. Why is it so full of fluff (The manual contained all of the ISO sections repeated and rhetoric ISO jargon, etc. about this time the old phrase "KISS' hit me).
3. Why does it track with the standard? Can't we format this as we see fit? ( My thoughts were we can it's our document and it is intended to help our business not impede it).
4. Why can't we drive down the specifics into our tier two documents and work instructions? (I thought we can and it would make better sense since these are the documents that are used on a daily basis).
Today our QM is 40 pages and is very easy to read and understand. We drove the specifics to our QP's and work instructions with flowcharts. During our recent pre-assessment audit our auditor commented that the manual was a refreshing read and had only a couple of minor suggestions for improvement.
So keep in mind that your quality manual should reflect your orgainzation's current quality culture and not be a reread of ISO9001.
Kind regards,
Al