Quality Manual - feedback requested

smryan

Perspective.
I'm undertaking a re-do of our quality manual. The original version is a 22 page regurgitation of the ISO 9001:2008 manual to which we are successfully certified. One of my tasks is streamlining and this is the current target.

If there are any ISO certification auditors reading the thread I'd be especially interested in your feedback on the attached Q Manual. The 6 section format is a standard format seen in ALL our documentation, so that aspect won't be changing. The high rev# (14) is due to it previously containing redundant charts and such that change yearly - gone now.

:thanx: in advance!!
 

Attachments

  • P101 DRAFT Quality Manual.pdf
    126.3 KB · Views: 589

John Broomfield

Leader
Super Moderator
I found it a waste of time for the average user. I would put the first page at the back.

I would think the average user of the SBE QMS wants to know how their QMS works as a whole and how they use it to satisfy customers and improve performance.

Instead it talks about maintaining certification and points to the procedures and other system documents.

The policy (section 5.0) is not a policy with the possible exception of 5.2 and 5.4. It describes some history, refers to an "ISO designated Management Representative" and a checklist to ensure the QMS conforms to ISO 9001.

ISO did not designate your MR. But you could usefully define the authority (powers) of the QMS Manager and his or her role and responsibilities in developing, maintaining, auditing and improving the QMS.

If your QMS needs a contents page then I would publish it as that but not call it a quality manual.

Lastly, I could see nothing in this manual that describes what the leaders of SBE do to ensure the QMS is used and improved.
 

smryan

Perspective.
I found it a waste of time for the average user. I would put the first page at the back.

I would think the average user of the SBE QMS wants to know how their QMS works as a whole and how they use it to satisfy customers and improve performance.

Instead it talks about maintaining certification and points to the procedures and other system documents.

The policy (section 5.0) is not a policy with the possible exception of 5.2 and 5.4. It describes some history, refers to an "ISO designated Management Representative" and a checklist to ensure the QMS conforms to ISO 9001.

ISO did not designate your MR. But you could usefully define the authority (powers) of the QMS Manager and his or her role and responsibilities in developing, maintaining, auditing and improving the QMS.

If your QMS needs a contents page then I would publish it as that but not call it a quality manual.

Lastly, I could see nothing in this manual that describes what the leaders of SBE do to ensure the QMS is used and improved.

4.2.2 Quality manual
The organization shall establish and maintain a quality manual that includes
a) the scope of the quality management system, including details of and justification for any exclusions (see 1.2),
b) the documented procedures established for the quality management system, or reference to them, and
c) a description of the interaction between the processes of the quality management system.

Why would I want to duplicate information in the Q.Manual that is already thoroughly covered in the documents referenced? Such redundancies are exactly the things I am trying to get rid of. As far as I can see the only reason in our system to have a Q Manual is because the ISO requires it. The only person who is going to read it is the Auditor. The other QMS documents are very thorough and useful - this not so much.
 

John Broomfield

Leader
Super Moderator
I am not recommending you repeat the procedures. Each procedure describes how a process fulfills its objective.

I am recommending that you use the manual to describe [for the employees] how the management system fulfills and renews its objectives. How it enables the organization to satisfy customers and manage continual improvement. How the leaders ensure the employees have the management system they need to determine and meet customer requirements. In other words how the system works.

Where else in the management system do you define the authority of the MR as the QMS Manager?
 

AndyN

Moved On
I tend to agree with john. BTW - where do you describe the "sequence and interaction"?

I'd hope - since ISO 9001 compliance doesn't infer certification - that it wasn't only the auditor who reads this stuff. It's in ISO 9001 for a reason - not to pass audits. You did ask for feedback, and it was offered. Please don't become defensive if you are looking for help. It's not an attack, it's a commentary which is what you should expect.

Personally, I like 3 page manuals, but if the content isn't much help to someone who wants to read it - and I found it presenting an odd level of detail in some respect (the checklist) while missing the "bigger picture"!

Part of the problem of this type of feedback is it isn't dynamic. We write, we hope you understand, you interpret - rightly or wrongly. It is what it is. Nothing personal.
 

smryan

Perspective.
Thank you John & Andy both. I don't mean to sound defensive. I don't disagree that a useful document would be far more worthwhile than a document that exists purely because of an ISO bullet. I'm weeding a couple dozen of THOSE out of the system.

The History was part of the prior Q.Manual - I took it from a page to a paragraph - but I am not opposed to losing it altogether if it adds no value. I think part of my problem is the prior version is my only exposure to a Quality Manual. And so far my Googling has turned up manuals that are a similar regurgitation of ISO bullets.

I have better worded the MR / QManager definition. c) has a line item pointing to an existing flowchart.

HOW do I "describe [for the employees] how the management system fulfills and renews its objectives" without being redundant of my other documents? I know there have to be examples of 3 page quality manuals here but I'm not finding the link the the attachments/uploads list anywhere. :read:

Wait - I found that link - waaaaay at the top!!
 
Last edited:

John Broomfield

Leader
Super Moderator
You could describe how your system works and hyperlink the key phrases in this description to the QMS documents [instead of repeating the master list] along the following lines:

SBE's leaders are committed to helping employees to understand and meet requirements. For this we have established our quality policy, quality objectives and procedures working together within the SBE QMS. Please review and relate these documents to your work.

Please refer to the procedures that help us to understand customer requirements and make sure we can meet them before making our promise. Please review the procedures that ensure we have competent people and capable equipment. The planning procedures ensure we understand the risks and have the necessary resources, processes and controls in place to ensure that we fulfill each customer's requirements.

You will also find the procedures specific to your work. Please review them and make sure they are accurate. Suggest improvements to your <whomever>

...and so on all the way thru the core process (aka: value stream) to receiving the cash necessary to invest in improvement.

You could then describe how the employees improve their processes before and after things go wrong. You could also explain how the supervisors monitor processes to ensure employees have all they need to meet requirements.

Lastly you could refer the reader to continual improvement processes such as problem solving, reviewing the performance of the QMS and auditing.

I would avoid ISO-eze and any mention of certification. Employees want to do good work and you do not want them to see the QMS as a burden just to keep a certificate.
 
Top Bottom