I'm currently looking at establishing both quality and project management methodology in a software development company. As I see it, the key advantage of the new ISO standard is the emphasis on process not multi-level procedure. I'm hoping to reduce our entire quality system down to a series of detailed process flows, a related process document that defines roles etc., supporting tools for each, and a quality manual from which the above will hang off.
A pared-down, process-driven view of the company's business has more chance of being perceived as useful. I'll be selling quality in these terms to Top Management who, having suffered under poorly implemented old ISO, should be on-board with the idea...
My question is this...
Is this too simplistic an approach? Would we survive an audit?!
Not at all. This is precisely what I am doing to our current Quality Program.
Would we survive an audit?!
Yes. Auditors might not be accustom to seeing the Quality Program presented this way, but there isn't anything wrong with it. The key is to be sure to give clear understanding when verbiage is required.
I'm so glad you brought this up! This is what I am hoping to do when we change our system over to ISO 9000:2001. I too was a little leary of doing it in case it was too 'light'. However, if all the elements are covered and all criteria is met and understood I don't understand why it would not be considered acceptable to auditors. Have you received some negative feedback on this?
Concept of quality
Linear Mode
