ISO 9001:2015 Transition Quality Manual Update - Redundant Content

R

Russ

Still working on updating our Quality Manual to 9001:2015. As I have been working I have found that many of our procedures seem to be somewhat redundant compared to the Policy section of our manual. I think this update is going to allow for quite a few of our old procedures to be removed from the QMS. Have many of you found this shrinkage of the manual to be the case? If so could you share some of the things you found to be redundant?:D
 

Golfman25

Trusted Information Resource
I suppose it depends on what your quality manual looks like. Years ago, we had the old "regurgitate the standard manual," backed up by procedures. Over the years, we pitched the manual and just kept the procedures. These days our "manual" is just the quality policy, our scope, some boilerplate about the company and a matrix showing how the standard is applied.
 

AndyN

Moved On
Still working on updating our Quality Manual to 9001:2015. As I have been working I have found that many of our procedures seem to be somewhat redundant compared to the Policy section of our manual. I think this update is going to allow for quite a few of our old procedures to be removed from the QMS. Have many of you found this shrinkage of the manual to be the case? If so could you share some of the things you found to be redundant?:D

Yeah, I've shrunk one to just 2 "pages"...
 

normzone

Trusted Information Resource
Ditto. Was 30+ pages, is now 4 pages.

I'm a minimalist when it comes to such matters, but mine still comes in at about 25 pages.

Most of that, however, is the price paid for big margins, large fonts, liberal use of white space, and redundant tables summing up the contents of each section at the end of that section for ease of auditing. Why not go easy on the eyes when you can? It's only pixels, there's no shortage of them.
 

dsanabria

Quite Involved in Discussions
Still working on updating our Quality Manual to 9001:2015. As I have been working I have found that many of our procedures seem to be somewhat redundant compared to the Policy section of our manual. I think this update is going to allow for quite a few of our old procedures to be removed from the QMS. Have many of you found this shrinkage of the manual to be the case? If so could you share some of the things you found to be redundant?:D

OK - what I have done is to provide the requirements of the standard and the below - provide the actual procedure - thus - one document for the entire company. that means that they have to go to the quality manual read the stuff and search for thier are, glance at the requirements of the standard and...bingo! - one document / forms... :))
 

Jen Kirley

Quality and Auditing Expert
Leader
Admin
I have often seen the results of long-term actions that involve adding to, versus changing. When that happens we can end up with a lot of redundancy. Redundancy facilitates the risk of error when information gets updated in one place and not the other(s). It may make sense to map out your processes and refer to procedures there. You can look them over and consolidate/reduce to the point that your people are left with what they need to succeed and a minimum of fluff. Now is a good time for that.
 

Colin

Quite Involved in Discussions
Much of this will depend on the context of the organisation and the risks encountered, but in general I have been writing manuals around 12 pages long (for around 10 years now) and typically around 7 or 8 procedures.

I don't think it is about redunadancy of procedures, more about combining them to address the processes of the business rather than the clauses of the standard. This naturally brings down the number required.
 

normzone

Trusted Information Resource
I don't think it is about redundancy of procedures, more about combining them to address the processes of the business rather than the clauses of the standard. This naturally brings down the number required.

Agreed.

I also have two approaches to process documentation. I tend to have individual process documents when the matter gets complex, and for simpler issues I generally collect them all in one catchall document that gets everything that doesn't readily fit anyplace else.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

AshleyE

I remember assisting a sister company with their recert audit to 2008 and their Auditor lost his mind when I showed our company's 4 page quality manual as an example of what we were doing.
"THAT'S TOO RADICAL FOR ME, THAT'S NOT A QUALITY MANUAL. THAT WOULD BE A NONCONFORMITY IF I AUDITED YOUR SYSTEM."

However, he could not point out where in the standard it required to regurgitate the standard. Only that it was too radical for him.

That was a fun day. He was a creep to boot.
 
Top Bottom