7.1 Planning of Product Realization vs. 7.1.1 Project Management

[speck]

I have started the transition to AS9100C for next year and I'm taking this in bites. I was unable to find any reference or threads covering this one yet in the AS9100 forum. The direct question or discussion is what additional requirements does section 7.1.1 Project management of AS9100C pose over section 7.1 Planning of product realization? All my logical thoughts keep coming up with the simple fact that if you have a product realization process that has been around for years suitable to your needs and includes "7.1.e configuration management appropriate to the product, at the very least what other project management activities can be imposed to cover 7.1.1 project management. I can't seem to draw a distinction between them. They seem redundant to me. Any help, opinions or insight would be greatly appreciative. As always thanks, for your time, efforts and experience.

 

[Randy]

Re: 7.1 planning of Product realization vs 7.1.1 project management

What's to understand? It clearly states that if appropriate, management activities related to the creation of the product have to be done in an organized and controlled manner that will enable the organization and product to meet risk, cost and time requirements.

7.1.1 is a subset of 7.1

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Re: 7.1 planning of Product realization vs 7.1.1 project management

The direct question or discussion is what additional requirements does section 7.1.1 Project management of AS9100C pose over section 7.1 Planning of product realization?

I think this is a great question from the small & medium size enterprise perspective. If you are a small aerospace supplier and you are effectively executing planning of the product realization processes (AS9100C 7.1), why have it done through an "artificial" project management perspective?

I have voiced several times my concern to the IAQG Requirement Stream leadership over the lack of guidance on the admissible scalability associated with project and risk management expectations. According to the AS9100C support documents, project management, risk management & configuration management can not be deemed non-applicable, irrespective of the supplier size or product lines. I am concerned that, inadvertently, the IAQG has introduced the potential for tremendous variation in the AS9100C conformity assessment process.

 

[dv8shane]

Re: 7.1 planning of Product realization vs 7.1.1 project management

I agree with Sidney and Randy, but as a small business owner I see project management as specific to a specific project.

 

[Randy]

Re: 7.1 planning of Product realization vs 7.1.1 project management

I agree with Sidney and Randy, but as a small business owner I see project management as specific to a specific project.

That's why it says "as appropriate to the organization and the product"

 

[dv8shane]

Re: 7.1 planning of Product realization vs 7.1.1 project management

That's why it says "as appropriate to the organization and the product"

that quote really says it all. I knew there was a reason I followed the plan. LOL

 

[speck]

Thank you. I guess I can interpret (I think) from the responses that there is consensus, they are overlapping in a small business setting. "As appropriate to the organization" is that our current process of planning of product realization is indeed the project planning activities and is appropriate for our needs. I will add a couple words to my planning procedure and rename it "Project management of planning of product realization" and be done with it.

 

[Buckyb]

As one of the "stuckees" to assist in transitioning our company to AS9100C, Elsmar is the only place that I have been able to ascertain some of what is needed and expected from the new revision.....thank you! If you Google any of the clauses for Rev C you mostly get companies who want you to attend "their" courses $$$$$$ so they can "explain" $$$$$$ all this to you. I sometimes get the feeling that this revision is less about continuous improvement and more about "how much money is it going to take to keep the AS9100 Registration". We have agonized for years developing a viable QMS and were just getting comfortable with Rev B and now....here we go again.

 

[dannmarks]

I am just starting to write our new Rev C Manual. Everything seemed pretty straightforward until I hit this section 7.1 Note: Quality objectives and requirements for the product include consideration of aspects such as _ product and personal safety, reliability, availability, and maintainability; producibility and inspectability etc.

At first it threw me. Then I remembered that this Rev was pushed buy the Customers to meet their needs. Product and personal safety I assume to mean greater care for consideration on parts not leading to law suits because the product failed etc. Next was - reliability, availability, and maintainability - and I assume this means, products that won't break or fail, and in this age of low inventory having parts available, and parts or units that can be maintained without corroding, shelf life issues or being able to having them be refurbished rather than thrown away. Finally for those that have dealt with MBD's flow down instead of drawings having parts that are producible and that can be inspected is an art in its self.

The times have changed; the Mainframe companies realize this and are forcing better quality systems on suppliers in response.

If I have misunderstood these constructs I would appreciate input before I finish the new QM.

 

[Jeff Frost]

Project management for the most part falls under 7.1 and sub-clauses of standard and you should make reference in the quality manual how your process meets the stated requirements. If contractually required you must appoint a member of your staff to serve as the project manager for the company per the contract.