Your comments on the contents of the attachment please. Any suggestions for improving it will be greatly appreciated
Hennie, I like your map, but suggest you add Training and competence under HR in blue as a support, and Process design under Engineering/SHE in green as customer oriented. I saw a QA function in addition to QC. I would add Internal Audit under the QA function as a yellow Management oriented.
These are suggestions of things I would add for our process. May not apply to yours.
__________________
"Nothing is constant except change"
Ralph, appreciate your comments. Do you suggest that I enter it under these key functions across the different product introduction stages?
I suggest you enter them with the Engineering/SHE a Process design in green in the Product/Process section and also the HR blue block in that same section. Then I would put the QA audit yellow block in the top part of the series production section. Do what meets your actual interaction sequence for your operation. Process design items like APQP, FMEAs, Control Plans, and Training & competence, and internal audits are key functions. These will be instrumental in controlling and improving you processes. Also, 3rd party auditors will definately want to see your documentation and records to verify compliance.
Hope this helps.
__________________
"Nothing is constant except change"
of the process. I would like to offer a couple of comments. You have done a great job of keeping the activity descriptions to just 'verb/noun' relationships; 'Customer approval', etc. Using 'swim lanes' is also a nice technique to show the responsibilities. I do however want to share with you (and other readers) that there are some other aspects to this kind of flow chart vs. an effective 'process map' - a process map should be created by a cross-functional team made up from people who are the customers, suppliers and users of the process, including the process 'owner'. The creation of the map should be the 'current state' (like a Lean Value stream map). This method will identify much of the non-value added activities, such as the places where processing information gets 'held up' because all the info. isn't available. For example; when processing a Purchasing requisition, how many are not processed and 'wait' on a buyers desk, while the buyer processes the 'complete' ones? The volume and waiting etc associated with this type of activity can be captured.
Similarly, the various process measurement details for the process should be included, since the process owner will have to indicate what gets measured (against the quality objectives) to indicate the (effective) performance of the process.
Once these are included in the diagram, you've got a good place to start improvements...............!!
Andy
I like it a lot - in particular you have avoided the "ISO numbers and names" trap so many of us fall into.
You have a nice little business system there - that just happens to meet all the requirments for a quality system. Well done.
Could you elaborate a bit on the "ISO numbers and names" trap? Years ago in our 9K2K registration audit, we received an observation for not having applicable procedures (level II) and work instructions (level III) listed with their appropriate tasks.
I always thought it made sense to be able to immediately identify which procedure, by name and number, applied to each box on the map, no?
Process Mapping - I would like your opinions and advice on my process map
Linear Mode
