ISO 9001 Required Roles and Responsibilities?

[adam0010]

I am on a team currently working through bringing an ISO 9001:1994 system up to date for a 15 person software development company.


We are trying to clean up the documentation and are seeing lots of documents referring to very specific roles on the ISO team that really don't seem needed to us. The list follows. It has its own document entitled: "Master List of ISO Roles/Titles (Also referred to as Quality Management Team)"

Quality Management Representative
ISO Meeting Chairman
Alternate Quality Management Representative
Quality Manager
Internal Audit Manager
Engineering Program Manager
Inventory Manager
Infrastructure Manager
Information Security Manager
Purchasing Manager
Training Monitor
Secretary
Customer Survey Monitor
Info Systems/Quality Documentation Manager
Internal Auditors

Neat huh?! We don't define these roles at the company level, so they tell me that they thought ISO required these things. Seems to me the only roles the standard expects are: Quality Manager for care and feeding of the QMS, Management Representative for feeding the Quality Manager, and Internal Auditor(s) to make sure the feedings are done correctly.

I sure as heck don't think that ISO demands a Customer Survey Monitor... Or am I way off here? (It is past my bedtime.)


I also found that when a role switched to someone else, there was a formal approval of this in a QMR meeting and then a fancy letterhead signed document was scanned and uploaded into the system. Nobody wants to do any of that if they don't have to, and I don't think they do have to... right?


And hello to the forum! So much great information here!

 

[Randy]

Re: ISO 9001 Required Roles?

All 9001 refers to is management system representative, organizations management, personnel performing work, personnel and top management.

Most of what you have listed isn't even mentioned or suggested by 9001.

Let me ask you a question...Where would all those folks come from in a one or two person organization?

 

[JaneB]

Re: ISO 9001 Required Roles?

It has its own document entitled: "Master List of ISO Roles/Titles (Also referred to as Quality Management Team)

Heaven help us, but someone presumably didn't have enough to do, so they obviously needed to create yet 'nother 'masterlist.

they tell me that they thought ISO required these things.

It still truly astonishes me what people 'think' that a Standard requires. Why on earth don't they just read it and think about what's in it? Which would help avoid some of this cr*p appearing, one would think.

Seems to me the only roles the standard expects are: Quality Manager for care and feeding of the QMS, Management Representative for feeding the Quality Manager, and Internal Auditor(s)

As Randy says, it doesn' t talk about roles or titles at all. It does say you have to define responsiblities and authorities (good idea). It does mandate certain activities that must be performed. But the how is up to you. You can call people Grand Poobah, Great Grand Poobah and Great Great Great (Call me God) Poobay if you wish. Entirely up to you.

I sure as heck don't think that ISO demands a Customer Survey Monitor

Nope. Sounds like someone grabbed a few words out of 8.2.1 perhaps (just a few though!), tossed 'em up in the air and then put them together in a different order. (Like I said - not enough to do? Or bears of little brain?)

What it does say in ISO 9001 2008 is:

8.2.1 Customer satisfaction
As one of the measurements of the performance of the quality management system, the organization shall monitor information relating to customer perception as to whether the organization has met customer requirements. The methods for obtaining and using this information shall be determined.
NOTE Monitoring customer perception can include obtaining input from sources such as customer satisfaction surveys, customer data on delivered product quality, user opinion surveys, lost business analysis, compliments, warranty claims and dealer reports.

I call your attention to the NOTE (this was added in the 2008 version).

I also found that when a role switched to someone else, there was a formal approval of this in a QMR meeting and then a fancy letterhead signed document was scanned and uploaded into the system. Nobody wants to do any of that if they don't have to, and I don't think they do have to... right?

OK, not only did they not have enough to do, but they also had shares in a printing company?

Here's a suggestion: what would an organisation with a reasonably clear system of management do in such a case? How about you try that out? Across the board?

Keep going.
My advice: read the Standard itself. No substitute for knowing what it actually says (vs what people think/believe/'know'/vaguely recall/have been told/misinterpret etc)

Clear out the rubbish and 'oh for heaven's sake!!' stuff. Get it back to practical, good business sense. That's what it's really about. Not busy work.