Does ISO 9001:2015 call for a Policy or a Statement

G

glenn0004

We have been reviewing some of our corporate policies and have identified that they are of a poor standard if considered against a document hierarchy, the don’t define the organisations intent regarding the subject matter; instead they start to defined the relative process to a Level 4 detail.
In response I’ve developed a clear template for all future policies but at the same time noticed that our own 9001 quality policy (and also the same for many other organisations) is not written from an intent perspective – what we will do to meet the requirements but instead is a statement of how we have met the requirements… If I’m not mistaken the standard (9001:2015) calls for a policy not a statement. Have we been getting this wrong?
 

dsanabria

Quite Involved in Discussions
We have been reviewing some of our corporate policies and have identified that they are of a poor standard if considered against a document hierarchy, the don’t define the organisations intent regarding the subject matter; instead they start to defined the relative process to a Level 4 detail.
In response I’ve developed a clear template for all future policies but at the same time noticed that our own 9001 quality policy (and also the same for many other organisations) is not written from an intent perspective – what we will do to meet the requirements but instead is a statement of how we have met the requirements… If I’m not mistaken the standard (9001:2015) calls for a policy not a statement. Have we been getting this wrong?

Can you paste the Quality Policy so we could see what you are making reference to?
 
G

glenn0004

Can you paste the Quality Policy so we could see what you are making reference to?
Thanks for your response, below is a generic 9001:2008 policy (not our policy) that is available as a template to be considered as acceptable and is a sample of the type of supplier policies that are submitted as part of supplier approval. However the tense is that the organisation has done XYZ instead of shall or will; which is what I would expect of a policy.
"{Insert company name} was established in {2000} to provide {facility management services} to the
{building} industry. We are based in {Croydon} and employ {25} people.
Quality is important to our business because we value our customers. We strive to provide our
customers with products and services which meet and even exceed their expectations. We are
committed to continuous improvement and have established a Quality Management System
which provides a framework for measuring and improving our performance.
We have the following systems and procedures in place to support us in our aim of total customer
satisfaction and continuous improvement throughout our business:-
1. regular gathering and monitoring of customer feedback
2. a customer complaints procedure
3. selection and performance monitoring of suppliers against set criteria
4. training and development for our employees
5. regular audit of our internal processes
6. measurable quality objectives which reflect our business aims
7. management reviews of audit results, customer feedback and complaints
Our internal procedures are reviewed regularly and are held in a Quality Manual which is made
available to all employees.
This policy is posted on the Company Notice Board and can also be found in the staff handbook.
Though the Managing Director has ultimate responsibility for Quality all employees have a
responsibility within their own areas of work so helping to ensure that Quality is embedded within
the whole of the company."
 

dsanabria

Quite Involved in Discussions
Thanks for your response, below is a generic 9001:2008 policy (not our policy) that is available as a template to be considered as acceptable and is a sample of the type of supplier policies that are submitted as part of supplier approval. However the tense is that the organisation has done XYZ instead of shall or will; which is what I would expect of a policy.

Nice job but I tough you wanted comments on your policy not a genetic one. Please post your actual policy.

Hard to make statement on a genetic template...
 
D

DRAMMAN

You are required to create, communicate, and maintain a Quality Policy. This is detailed in clause 5.2
 
G

glenn0004

Thanks again for your reply, however I’m not particularly looking for feedback of our current 9001:2008 policy or our draft 9001:2015 policy. What I am looking for is clarification weather the use of current tense is acceptable when drafting a “quality policy”.
If using current or past tense, what is drafted becomes a statement of what has been completed, however as a policy is “A formal declaration of the guiding principles and procedures by which a company will operate typically established by its board of directors or a senior management policy committee” the tense should be in the future.
Given what I see of many of our supplier’s policies, they all use current or past tense (or even both); this for me interprets their policy as statement and not a policy as per the requirements.
So back to my original point, should a quality policy be based on “shall” and “will” as opposed to “have”
 
B

bigqman

9000:2015 definition....
3.5.8
policy
<organization> intentions and direction of an organization (3.2.1) as formally expressed by its top management (3.1.1)

"future forward"

-AND-

3.5.9
quality policy
policy (3.5.8) related to quality (3.6.2)
Note 1 to entry: Generally the quality policy is consistent with the overall policy of the organization (3.2.1), can be aligned with the organization’s vision (3.5.10) and mission (3.5.11) and provides a framework for the setting of quality objectives (3.7.2).
 

Randy

Super Moderator
OK, Newsflash! It doesn't matter what you call it or how it's formatted, all that matters is whether or not the minimum requirments are documented and you can show planning and fulfillment of them.

Now with that whatever it is you provided, I'll lay odds that the least paid, least important person in your company would lack "competent awareness" of the policy (meaning every bit of it), could not explain it and many of your leadership would fail the test as well.

You gave a business plan, not a policy, and every single word of it is now auditable and your feet are now cast in very fast setting cement.


My :2cents:
 

dsanabria

Quite Involved in Discussions
OK, Newsflash! It doesn't matter what you call it or how it's formatted, all that matters is whether or not the minimum requirments are documented and you can show planning and fulfillment of them.

Now with that whatever it is you provided, I'll lay odds that the least paid, least important person in your company would lack "competent awareness" of the policy (meaning every bit of it), could not explain it and many of your leadership would fail the test as well.

You gave a business plan, not a policy, and every single word of it is now auditable and your feet are now cast in very fast setting cement.


My :2cents:

Excellent and properly said....

Furthermore...
what was provided sound like a business plan and not a Quality Policy.

Furthermore, the issue of present and past tense is not what auditors are looking for - they are not grammar professor.

Bottom line - if you want to use what ever tense you want to - fine.

Just make sure that people have a clue on how they contribute, understand it and meets requirement
 
G

glenn0004

Thanks Randy..100% true regarding the least paid and leadership. However I cant get away from the notion that a policy should be intent (covering the minimum stated requirements) and not a statement about what you have done. Unfortunately, in supplier evaluation I see a lot of the latter which leads me to think that the notion of a policy has been lost by organisations thinking that it's a mission or vision statement and somewhere down the line these have been audited as acceptable....
 
Top Bottom