I updated my Job Description - Critiques Appreciated

normzone

Trusted Information Resource
NOTE: UPDATED DRAFT AT THE END OF PAGE 2 THREAD

Turnover in HR generated churn, and I became aware of a lame document appended to my file. I mentioned the gap between reality and the job description and was asked to update it.

Below is my latest draft, nearly ready to share with my boss and HR. I'd be grateful for any input you have - thank you.

:)

Plan, coordinate and direct quality assurance program to ensure organizational processes are consistent with established standards. Assist top management in developing, improving, and sustaining the company management system so as to help employees add value and prevent loss

Assist managers with process analysis and process improvements

· Assist in development of procedures, work instructions and measureable objectives

· Evaluation and reporting of process performance data

· Maintain the company’s quality assurance manual as required

· Maintain an effective internal audit program to ensure that all processes are in compliance with customer statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements

· Maintain an effective corrective and preventive action (CAPA) program

· Act as point of contact for external audits by customers and regulatory agencies

· Develop and implement methods and procedures to assess Cost of Poor Quality (COPQ)

· Compile and write training material and conduct training

· Conduct audits at vendor’s locations, and conduct on-site inspection of drop ship product as required

· Review customer requirements and insure that the company has the ability to meet the defined requirements

· Maintain current knowledge of the quality assurance field

· Other job duties may be assigned as necessary.
 
Last edited:
Q

QAMTY

Re: Updated my job description - critiques appreciated

It may be necessary to add authorities, all of them sound like responsibilities.
Hope this helps
 

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Trusted Information Resource
Re: Updated my job description - critiques appreciated

... "ensure".
One of my pet peeves...

Which of these bullet points stretches you out of the doldrums?
If you get to write your own job description...stretch your area of influence with it and point toward what you want to be doing 5 years from now. You never know what might get approved! The most they can do is say "no", and that doesn't hurt so much...
 

RoxaneB

Change Agent and Data Storyteller
Super Moderator
Re: Updated my job description - critiques appreciated

It contains a lot of WHAT's but not a lot of HOW's or WHY's - perhaps the WHY is captured in the first part, but I don't see anything about the system adding value or achieving company objectives.

"Evaluation and reporting of process performance data" ... Don't process owners do this? Or is this for a specific process? How is this done? Why is this done? What if it read...

"Evaluate, analyze, and report on QMS-specific process results using quality tools to identify performance trends and possible opportunities to support the achievement of company objectives."
 

RoxaneB

Change Agent and Data Storyteller
Super Moderator
Re: Updated my job description - critiques appreciated

... "ensure".
One of my pet peeves...

Which of these bullet points stretches you out of the doldrums?
If you get to write your own job description...stretch your area of influence with it and point toward what you want to be doing 5 years from now. You never know what might get approved! The most they can do is say "no", and that doesn't hurt so much...

Very good point. The current description is very routine...where is the improvement, the innovation, the growth?

My own take is that my main purpose in Management Systems was to put myself out of job. I wasn't hired to police the system for the rest of my life. I was hired to create a culture where people owned their processes and took accountability for what needed to be done.

A clerk or a lower level person could maintain a procedure or a manual. I wanted to focus on the system itself and what we could do to make it even better.
 

normzone

Trusted Information Resource
Re: Updated my job description - critiques appreciated

Hmmm...all very good inputs, thank you so much. Thank you for helping me see things from a different perspective. The corporate culture is ... dysfunctional at best, I believe more so than your average outfit. I took on the challenge a few years ago, and by dint of my efforts and those of others it has improved, but it's still far from optimal.

" a lot of whats, but not hows and whys "... I can take a look at that and see where I can improve that, thank you.

Questions and comments -

Don't job descriptions usually just describe responsibilities? Authorities are usually a mix of the formally designated and the de facto (org chart, chain of command, functional realities). This outfit is not eager to extend any more authority to the Q position than they absolutely have to, and that is a handicap they may never overcome. We've had technical disagreements on the matter.

As for stretching out of the doldrums, given the nature of this business, I think the most satisfying part of the gig is seeing others grasp the tools used to assess processes and improve them.

My predecessor was ... difficult to get along with ... so nobody wanted to work with him. He built a system that revolved around himself, and documented a system that was a mix of what the company was doing, what he felt they should be doing, and what he fantasized they would do one day.

It was unauditable. I burned it to the ground and started fresh with what we were actually doing, and meeting the minimum requirements of 9001:2008.

Then we began process improvements. I've tried to structure it such that it requires as little oversight from me as practical. I want my successor to walk in, and after the de rigueur grumbling that I'd not done enough, be able to be effective immediately.
 

Coury Ferguson

Moderator here to help
Trusted Information Resource
Re: Updated my job description - critiques appreciated

Questions and comments -

Don't job descriptions usually just describe responsibilities? Authorities are usually a mix of the formally designated and the de facto (org chart, chain of command, functional realities). This outfit is not eager to extend any more authority to the Q position than they absolutely have to, and that is a handicap they may never overcome. We've had technical disagreements on the matter.

Job descriptions should identify what the actual responsibilities and authorities are. Without the authority, you would not specifically be able perform your job, and take any actions necessary, without the authority listed.

But, just my opinion.
 

normzone

Trusted Information Resource
Re: Updated my job description - critiques appreciated

"Evaluation and reporting of process performance data" ... Don't process owners do this? "

They would if this was a mature organization, and they will someday if I have my druthers. It's a new idea around here, and I volunteered to take raw data provided by process owners and show them how it's done until such time as I can convince them to do it themselves.

Job descriptions should identify what the actual responsibilities and authorities are.

I'll go looking for a good working example of one structured in that manner - if anybody has a reference I'd appreciate it.
 

RoxaneB

Change Agent and Data Storyteller
Super Moderator
Re: Updated my job description - critiques appreciated

Don't job descriptions usually just describe responsibilities?

Just because that's the way it's always been done doesn't mean that it's right. :cool: Be a trail blazer! ... That said, I can appreciate the situation in which you find yourself. It sounds as if there is quite a history there regarding the Quality function, but you can't help shape the new future of it if you don't try.

I don't have anything at my fingertips regarding authority, but let's look at:

"Develop and implement methods and procedures to assess Cost of Poor Quality (COPQ)"

I guess I would wonder if you have the authority to:
  • Make recommendations to address CoPQ issues
  • Implement actions to positively impact recurring CoPQ issues
  • Manage and follow-up on actions developed by process owners to address CoPQ issues.

If yes to the above points, would your original responsibility change to:

"Lead process owners and cross-functional teams in the application of standardized methods to address identified CoPQ issues."

The above line isn't perfect but it goes beyond procedure development and more into adding value to the organization. Maybe, in this job description, if you need to have it vetted by leadership, I'd avoid use of the word "authority". Instead, try framing it from the perspective of "activities and actions that add value, and support organizational objectives and the bottom-line.
 
Re: Updated my job description - critiques appreciated

I am in a similar position, and I have used "leveraged" language to point out and sometimes settle the authority issue. My description might be something like " ... develop and implement methods of improving the cost of poor quality and present these to the CFO for approval..."
As soon as the CFO hears about this 'assignment' the authority usually follows quickly. If you do not have the authority, simply report everything to those that do.
Authority is usually granted on a "need to have" basis. Demonstrate the need and see what happens. It takes some time, but it does develop, sometimes just so they do not have to get involved.
 
Top Bottom