J
John C
Todd,
Hi. How’s it going?
There’s not a thing wrong with what you have said above but, if you don’t say ‘commitment to comply with requirements’, or something that says much the same thing, eg; ‘...commitment to continual improvement and to compliance with the requirements of ISO 9001:2000’, somewhere in your policy, then you are likely to be asked to put it in. And why not? The registrar doesn’t have to give you the benefit of the doubt, especially when it is just a few words to add in - it doesn’t cost anything. The registrar has a duty to see the standard is covered to the best of his/her ability.
I often wonder at issues like this - people are very reluctant to do things and it’s hard to figure why until you start to get to the bottom of it. That’s where questions like yours can be so useful even if the conclusions I come up with do not fit your situation. I think, ‘Why not just put it in?’. But it isn’t always as simple as that;
People are very wary of having non-compliances written up against them. Often they will argue with the registrar and go on justifying their position, not because it is difficult, costly or time consuming to make the change but just because they feel they have been shown up to be wrong. Maybe it isn’t the person concerned, but their manager, who has this attitude. So the guy who looks after the system has to adopt the same attitude. (Managers are very often prone to this sort of thing because they’re mainly concerned with maintaining a positive image - don’t want anything to do with any blots on their career building copybook).
It’s a pity, if that is the case, because a registrar audit is supposed to be a situation where we engage a company to come in and provide a service for us. How stupid, if we pay all that money and then attempt to hide things from them, disagree with what they tell us, ignore their advice.
People, and especially managers, should take a more sensible approach, they’re well enough paid to be sensible, aren’t they? The registrar is not going to take your certificate away. They’re not looking to give you a hard time, or to have a hard time. They’ll be delighted if you treat them as customer/client to specialist service and not as an enemy.
In my experience, the registrar is the least of our problems. If audits are a pain, unpleasant, ineffective, etc, it’s probably someone in house, playing politics, that’s behind it all.
So there’s some thoughts on the issue, prompted by your question and, though probably not relevant in your case, it’s something else we’ve learned. ‘I can find the answers ok, if only I can get the right questions’, as the man said.
Why did you disagree with the registrar? It could be one out of a dozen reasons. Was it really because you didn’t want to write ‘comply with ISO 9001’? Don’t tell me, just think about it.
And that brings me to another idea; I touch type, learned it in the merchant navy. I do some writing for a hobby - which explains why I can’t stop when you ask me a question - you get more than you bargained for. I am also interested in documenting and figuring out ways to meet requirements. So it is very easy for me to pull down a procedure and make the change and release the document. Another thing, I know the change process backwards. It’s no problem.
But a lot of people I’ve come up against, have a mortal fear of changing a procedure. They’d rather change a diaper! Or do a thousand press-ups. Or just about anything, and they’d go to extraordinary lengths to avoid making the change.
So, one thing to think about is; love your registrar - keep them on your side, not so that they’ll go easy on you, but so that they’ll do a good job and help you sort your system. Next is - make things easy for people and yourself. The system needs to be very easy to use, otherwise people won’t use it. Better to be a little bit flakey, not 100% in control, and have people happy and able to follow it, than write it tight and put in so much concentrated detail to really tie everything down, that people just don’t use it and go on their way on a wing and a prayer.
Cut the bureaucracy.
Slim it down.
Get people on your side by making sure they write their own systems and only write what they want to write, and are willing to carry out.
rgds, John C
Hi. How’s it going?
There’s not a thing wrong with what you have said above but, if you don’t say ‘commitment to comply with requirements’, or something that says much the same thing, eg; ‘...commitment to continual improvement and to compliance with the requirements of ISO 9001:2000’, somewhere in your policy, then you are likely to be asked to put it in. And why not? The registrar doesn’t have to give you the benefit of the doubt, especially when it is just a few words to add in - it doesn’t cost anything. The registrar has a duty to see the standard is covered to the best of his/her ability.
I often wonder at issues like this - people are very reluctant to do things and it’s hard to figure why until you start to get to the bottom of it. That’s where questions like yours can be so useful even if the conclusions I come up with do not fit your situation. I think, ‘Why not just put it in?’. But it isn’t always as simple as that;
People are very wary of having non-compliances written up against them. Often they will argue with the registrar and go on justifying their position, not because it is difficult, costly or time consuming to make the change but just because they feel they have been shown up to be wrong. Maybe it isn’t the person concerned, but their manager, who has this attitude. So the guy who looks after the system has to adopt the same attitude. (Managers are very often prone to this sort of thing because they’re mainly concerned with maintaining a positive image - don’t want anything to do with any blots on their career building copybook).
It’s a pity, if that is the case, because a registrar audit is supposed to be a situation where we engage a company to come in and provide a service for us. How stupid, if we pay all that money and then attempt to hide things from them, disagree with what they tell us, ignore their advice.
People, and especially managers, should take a more sensible approach, they’re well enough paid to be sensible, aren’t they? The registrar is not going to take your certificate away. They’re not looking to give you a hard time, or to have a hard time. They’ll be delighted if you treat them as customer/client to specialist service and not as an enemy.
In my experience, the registrar is the least of our problems. If audits are a pain, unpleasant, ineffective, etc, it’s probably someone in house, playing politics, that’s behind it all.
So there’s some thoughts on the issue, prompted by your question and, though probably not relevant in your case, it’s something else we’ve learned. ‘I can find the answers ok, if only I can get the right questions’, as the man said.
Why did you disagree with the registrar? It could be one out of a dozen reasons. Was it really because you didn’t want to write ‘comply with ISO 9001’? Don’t tell me, just think about it.
And that brings me to another idea; I touch type, learned it in the merchant navy. I do some writing for a hobby - which explains why I can’t stop when you ask me a question - you get more than you bargained for. I am also interested in documenting and figuring out ways to meet requirements. So it is very easy for me to pull down a procedure and make the change and release the document. Another thing, I know the change process backwards. It’s no problem.
But a lot of people I’ve come up against, have a mortal fear of changing a procedure. They’d rather change a diaper! Or do a thousand press-ups. Or just about anything, and they’d go to extraordinary lengths to avoid making the change.
So, one thing to think about is; love your registrar - keep them on your side, not so that they’ll go easy on you, but so that they’ll do a good job and help you sort your system. Next is - make things easy for people and yourself. The system needs to be very easy to use, otherwise people won’t use it. Better to be a little bit flakey, not 100% in control, and have people happy and able to follow it, than write it tight and put in so much concentrated detail to really tie everything down, that people just don’t use it and go on their way on a wing and a prayer.
Cut the bureaucracy.
Slim it down.
Get people on your side by making sure they write their own systems and only write what they want to write, and are willing to carry out.
rgds, John C
