Terms and Definitions in a Quality Manual

[novusqc]

let me start by saying that our 1st manual was done by a registar and it is very much like the ISO standard, almost word for word.

my almost endless journey has been to adjust it so we can use it more effectively. The problem that i have run into is "terms and definitions".

what does this mean exactly. does the manual need to have a section devoted to "terms and definitions" and does my supporting procedures need a section devoted to "definitions" as well??

[SteelMaiden]

not necessarily. Are there terms needing definitions? Does it make sense for your organization? We have used them here, but most of our people were flippin burgers or driven tractors before we put this plant here. We use our quality manual in our orientation, including terms and definitions.

[novusqc]

thats kind of what i assumed. the idea to make our manual more user friendly came from the idea that "I" couldn't understand the manual. I can only hope that management can understand what i wrote (im not holding my breath)
any ideas on keeping it simple as to not bring up any red flags?

[SteelMaiden]

well, a lot of people would say I took the easy way out....I pretty much followed the standard, saying how we handle each part, referencing processes and procedures that address the issues. Nothing fancy. Here it is used mostly as a training tool. Customers and auditors use it more than anyone, and all the references are in there to follow the trail to the more detailed information.

[ScottK]

Oh boy.

I argued with our registrar for an hour on this subject because he was adamant that I absolutely require a "terms and definitions" section of my quality manual because there is a "terms and definitions" section of the ISO9001 standard (clause 3 - which is not part of the quality management system requirements. It's terms and definitions for the standard itself).

He maintianed that the quality manual was for OTHER PEOPLE to understand our QMS and I argued it was for MY COMPANY to understand the QMS.

I eventually threw my hands up in frustration and added a half page worth of terms that are kind-of-sort-of unique to my company.

This is documented somewhere here on the cove. I'd search for it but it's just that I'm about to leave.

[SteelMaiden]

yep, just do what works for your company.

[novusqc]

thanx for the insite. i do wonder how many registors find fault in this. i reviewed several vendor QM's and some had a section for it and others did not. i am going to try and simplify our manual in a way that i wont use big words so to speak.

[AndyN]

In Reply to Parent Post by novusqc

thanx for the insite. i do wonder how many registors find fault in this. i reviewed several vendor QM's and some had a section for it and others did not. i am going to try and simplify our manual in a way that i wont use big words so to speak.

I'm not sure it's a registrar or certification body 'thing', more likely to be a bias (and an unhealthy one at that) of a specific auditor.......Scott kept the peace, I'd encourage anyone who had that type of dialog to push back to the CB auditor's boss.......and if it was my specific CB, bring it to my attention too!


(Love the Dalek!!)