Should a Process Map have all the Core Processes?

[nitejava]

I have a question, I have been searching for an answer throughout the site and can't find it but this thread seems close.

Our Quality Manual has a Process Map, there are, maybe, 14 processes identified. I have read that having a map isn't necessary, but because we have one, shouldn't "order desk" and "shipping" be in that map seeing as they're core processes?
Is this an oversight by everyone, including our registrar and even me? *hangs head*

[M Greenaway]

The simple reply is yes, if your process maps (or whatever else defines your processes) misses what you would call a core process then yes they are severely lacking.

It may however simply be that what you see as a process, and what you call a process, is within the existing maps just that the author has perhaps created a higher level abstraction of the processes and bundled them up into something else - maybe !

[Helmut Jilling]

Originally Posted by nitejava

I have a question, I have been searching for an answer throughout the site and can't find it but this thread seems close.

Our Quality Manual has a Process Map, there are, maybe, 14 processes identified. I have read that having a map isn't necessary, but because we have one, shouldn't "order desk" and "shipping" be in that map seeing as they're core processes?
Is this an oversight by everyone, including our registrar and even me? *hangs head*

The requirement is to
a. define your processes, and
b. describe the sequence and interactions.

The standard allows you to decide the best method to do that. Many people choose to make a high level process map to describe the overview of those processes. But there are many different ways that could be done.

However, to your question, if you have defined certain processes, like "order desk" and "shipping," then yes, they should be on your map. You can't define them as processes and then leave them out.

Whether past auditors have missed that is not a criterion. (Clause 4.1 discusses this a little bit more).

[BradM]

I went ahead and split this question into it's own thread. I think it's a good question, and hopefully the action will minimize confusion with the other thread.

[Paul Simpson]

Originally Posted by nitejava

ss Map, there are, maybe, 14 processes identified. I have read that having a map isn't necessary, but because we have one, shouldn't "order desk" and "shipping" be in that map seeing as they're core processes?

I'll go out on a limb again here.

Order Desk and Shipping aren't core processes in their own right. They are both part of a core process that is "satisfying the customer requirements" or something similar.

[Manix]

Originally Posted by Paul Simpson

I'll go out on a limb again here.

Order Desk and Shipping aren't core processes in their own right. They are both part of a core process that is "satisfying the customer requirements" or something similar.

I may go out on a limb too (note: this is with a little apprehension as you have 20 years on me Paul!)

I don't agree, as I have just come off of a TS auditing course and we discussed core processes, and it seems to me that these are both core processes of any Manufacturing organisation.

I am assuming that "Order Desk" is Purchasing and Shipping is "Logistics". I see those as must have core processes and I think the "satisfying the customer requirements" thing is just stepping it up one notch. You could go even higher and say the main core business process is Making ££££ ($$$$!) and this is supported by "satisfying the customer requirements". The resolution you use to define your processes is debatable, but in a Capitalist environment, even if you are a charity or government agency, customer satisfaction is almost a given to achieving your objectives.

IMO of course!

[Paul Simpson]

Originally Posted by Manix

I may go out on a limb too (note: this is with a little apprehension as you have 20 years on me Paul!)

I always tell people it is not the age that counts - just the mileage on the clock.

Originally Posted by Manix

I don't agree, as I have just come off of a TS auditing course and we discussed core processes, and it seems to me that these are both core processes of any Manufacturing organisation.

Who ran the course - just for my information. My point that has been aired many times on the Cove is that if you start off defining processes at the micro level you end up sub-optimizing the system as a whole. Start off at the high level and only when achieving the objective requires it cascade down to the lower levels.

Originally Posted by Manix

I am assuming that "Order Desk" is Purchasing and Shipping is "Logistics".

I think order desk is probably sales order processing. So these core processes are all part of one process - where the customer starts off by defining their requirements all the way through the business to the product arriving at their facility.

If you "allow" Sales and Logisitics to have their own core processes you end up with the same old same old "over the wall" management where sales hit their own targets for processing orders, logistics theirs for time to despatch production orders and the customer is dissatisfied because the goods don't arrive in the time they asked for.

Originally Posted by Manix

I see those as must have core processes and I think the "satisfying the customer requirements" thing is just stepping it up one notch.

As above: unless the process as a whole is the one everyone in the business focuses on satisfying then you end up with silo thinking and a lack of customer focus.

Originally Posted by Manix

You could go even higher and say the main core business process is Making ££££ ($$$$!) and this is supported by "satisfying the customer requirements". The resolution you use to define your processes is debatable, but in a Capitalist environment, even if you are a charity or government agency, customer satisfaction is almost a given to achieving your objectives.

IMO of course!

A valid opinion. I tend to fight shy of putting financial measures in a quality system but there are others who disagree!

P.S. Good luck for Wednesday!

[Manix]

Originally Posted by Paul Simpson

Who ran the course - just for my information. My point that has been aired many times on the Cove is that if you start off defining processes at the micro level you end up sub-optimizing the system as a whole. Start off at the high level and only when achieving the objective requires it cascade down to the lower levels.

I think order desk is probably sales order processing. So these core processes are all part of one process - where the customer starts off by defining their requirements all the way through the business to the product arriving at their facility.


If you "allow" Sales and Logisitics to have their own core processes you end up with the same old same old "over the wall" management where sales hit their own targets for processing orders, logistics theirs for time to despatch production orders and the customer is dissatisfied because the goods don't arrive in the time they asked for.

As above: unless the process as a whole is the one everyone in the business focuses on satisfying then you end up with silo thinking and a lack of customer focus.

I am afraid it is 18:00 and I am tired and hungry and still at work!!!! So I will take your thoughts on board and maybe come back to them.

I understand what you are saying, in that "not my area" tends to creep in, but I do believe that functions of the organisation can have valid objectives that are customer focused even if you define their functional area separately from others. It is also very hard for people, no matter how hard you try, to think of the bigger picture, but hey maybe that is part of your "whole" training regime!

Valid points well made Paul, thank you.

Originally Posted by Paul Simpson

A valid opinion. I tend to fight shy of putting financial measures in a quality system but there are others who disagree!

Just one thing that I am hearing more and more here in the Cove and on my training, this is not a Quality Management System and is a Business Management System, and the main measure any management team will be interested in is the money!!!!! At the end of the day and all that........

Originally Posted by Paul Simpson

P.S. Good luck for Wednesday!

Thanks, I am very nervous, but hey a 6th European Cup would be very nice indeed and would make my YEAR.