AS9100D: Is a product Quality Control Plan required?
- Thread starter Jafri
- Start date
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
Randy
Super Moderator
Yeah, maybe so, but I think it's a better help by showing folks how to put a worm on the hook.
John Predmore
Trusted Information Resource
In line with the @Sidney Vianna comment above, I often remind myself, the original poster is not the only person I am writing a response for. There are hundreds of visitors who read postings, every month, and for months after. Many of them come from different industries and different circumstances, for whom English may be a second language. I choose to resist the urge to be snarky in this public forum where comments will survive (hopefully) for decades, even after I am gone. So in the big picture, I can afford to be a bit patient, and help a unmet friend indeed.
matthewjd24
Starting to get Involved
I think it's far more helpful to both answer the question and remind the poster that the answer is in the standard, and that they should become very familiar with it and go to it first whenever they have a question. In the future, they'll get the answer a lot faster by looking at the standard first.
Maybe they read it and missed it? Maybe they misunderstood the wording? I try to keep an open mind. There's a way to nudge people to be better while being helpful and kind.
And of course, if your answer rubs them the wrong way (even if you're in the right), they're a lot less likely to learn from your advice, are less likely to use the forum in the future, and will feel a need to defend themselves in the thread. I think trying not to unnecessarily upset people is a virtue in its own right.
Maybe they read it and missed it? Maybe they misunderstood the wording? I try to keep an open mind. There's a way to nudge people to be better while being helpful and kind.
And of course, if your answer rubs them the wrong way (even if you're in the right), they're a lot less likely to learn from your advice, are less likely to use the forum in the future, and will feel a need to defend themselves in the thread. I think trying not to unnecessarily upset people is a virtue in its own right.
Last edited:
Kronos147
Trusted Information Resource
I would look at the customer requirements. From my experience, this is a flow down from several of our customers.
I can't help myself from commenting here about a note in the standard near the end of element 8.1. 8.1 details the requirements for production planning. The note reads:
"As an output of this planning, documented information specifying the processes of the quality management system and the resources to be applied to a specific product, service, or contract can be referred to as a quality plan." (Emphasis added)
Notes are not requirements. They are intended to add clarity or illumination. Even the wording avoids a "shall", instead using a "can".
As others have noted, you might have a customer requirement for a quality plan, but you may have already built one into your traveler.
"As an output of this planning, documented information specifying the processes of the quality management system and the resources to be applied to a specific product, service, or contract can be referred to as a quality plan." (Emphasis added)
Notes are not requirements. They are intended to add clarity or illumination. Even the wording avoids a "shall", instead using a "can".
As others have noted, you might have a customer requirement for a quality plan, but you may have already built one into your traveler.
mattador78
Quite Involved in Discussions
From my experience here we have a generic control plan for all products (AS9100) and specfic control plans built from specific customer requirements.
