Quality Manual Interrelationship Matrix

I am currently trying to rewrit the INTERRELATION MATRIX/CORRESPONDANCE for our company's Quality manual in line with FDIS 9001. Is it necessary to include all the clauses/sub-clauses/sub-sub clauses of the standard(Exa:5.5.1,5.6.1,6.2.1 & so on). Unlike the existing version our practice was to maintion 20 main clauses only, can we drop some generic sub-clauses as stated above.

Will appreciate any new idea.

Thanks,

Ak

[Marc]

I see no reason to 'drop' them but I see no specific reason for them as long as you can show where they are each addressed. I haven't done a matrix yet, however when I do I'll include all the sub-elements because it's 'easier' for me.

Thank you very much Mark for your remarks.If you stay on this, I will ask a related question. A company intending to establish a Management system manual, which will necessarily comply to ISO-9001(00)(after 12/15/00)+ ISO-17025(99)+ ISO-14001(96)+ say a couple more requirements from NVLAP/AASHTO/ASTM E1212(95) will have to integrate the similar requirement into one clause/sub-clause in their apex manual. In such case,would you advise to maintain the structure exactly in line with ISO-9001 or a minor departure is not an objection during document review process.
Shall be much thankful for a path forward.

Rick,
Thanks for your voice. I do expect the same interpretaion from the auditor who will be reviewing the documents for compliance. In true sense, compliance does not necessarily mean clause by clause coverage, and here comes the reason to skip the generic sub-clauses(exa- general at 5.5.1 & so on)

Ak

[Rick Goodson]

Ak

Your situation is a good example of why the Quality Manual should be based on how you run your business, not the ISO 9001 standard. If you document your systems, and use a matrix for each of the standards you have to meet, it does not matter how the manual is laid out.

[Marc]

Do remember this:

If you use a matrix and the auditor goes to a specific line item from the ISO document (let's say you take the example that you 'exclude' servicing) you still have to address it somewhere if only to say it is not applicable and why. I write quality manuals based upon ISO 9001 because over the years I have found many auditors come down to line items - asking "...where do you address...?"

Recent example: Auditor cited (as minor, but none the less) client for not addressing quality record legibility (it was not explicitly stated that quality records shall be legible) which, I must admit, is to me a Duh - I guess so!

This was just a nit-pick but the point is they can do this with every sentence of ISO 9001 -- "Where do you say that ....?"

Marc
Thanks for the tips. This amounts to following conclusion> we need to show compliance to clause by clause(sub-clause by sub-clause & so on) correspondance for every standard (Quality mgmt, env mgmt,ISMS, health & safety & so on), we claim implementation & compliance.

[Marc]

> we need to show compliance to clause by clause
> (sub-clause by sub-clause & so on)

Every sentence, every bulleted item -- you name it.